Posted by Riley DeWiley on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:06 | #

They missed a good chance to kill him ...

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:24 | #

Can you imagine the endless “news stories” and “docudramas” they’d saturate us with if he’d been killed—not to mention the damage to the Ron Paul campaign?

A real military assault, as opposed to an assault staged for maximum martyrdom sympathy, will most likely be on the board of directors or executive suite—rather than sock puppets like Hannity.

Posted by Frank McGuckin on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:54 | #

James

Wouldn’t it be much better if there more people like Paul in office at the county and state levels and then on to the congress? Wouldn’t it be better if the energy and enthusiasm of Ron Paul’s suporters were focused on building a strong political infrastructure at the bottom?

Any how, let us supose that Ron Paul does not get elected? What is your strategy in the future?

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:32 | #

Certainly peaceful reform is preferable, Frank.  The approach to that has been discussed quite extensively here and it boils down to establishing human ecologies focused on freedom of association using opportunities like the the Ron Paul grassroots campaign as a kind of trellis. 

That is, in fact, the only realistic hope for peace other than the kind of peace that comes with death or slavery.

What you don’t seem to get is that events are spinning out of control.  Peaceful freedom may not be an option.  So what is YOUR strategy for the future given the increasing likelihood of events like staged attacks on talking heads or real military assaults on the boardrooms of old media companies?

Posted by GT on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:51 | #

The Iowa/Huckabee/Paul/Fox/NH situation is nearly optimal for an outbreak of violence targeting the meat sitting in the old media offices

It would be nice to think so, but I don’t.  At most – and this is extremely doubtful – a handful of low-level talking heads could find themselves temporarily or permanently indisposed. RP’s cyber-activists are too dependent upon the judeoconomy to violently vent their anger in a credibly wide and sustainable manner.

Wouldn’t it be better if the energy and enthusiasm of Ron Paul’s suporters were focused on building a strong political infrastructure at the bottom?

The only point in preserving the Ron Paul infrastructure is so that it may become integrated with an opposing socioeconomic structure. Without alternative socioeconomics an opposing political infrastructure could not acquire sufficient strength to effect change. At best it would stay marginal, as the BNP is marginal or become co-opted, as the Republican and the various third parties are co-opted.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:04 | #

RP’s cyber-activists are too dependent upon the judeoconomy to violently vent their anger in a credibly wide and sustainable manner.

While we agree there may be some talking heads targeted in some way (again—I tend to see that happening most probably via staged events for maximum martyrdom sympathy) when I say “military” I’m not thinking of the typical Ron Paul supporters but more of military veterans—most probably returned from Iraq.  Many of these guys are in a different mental configuration due to their experiences “over there”.  I don’t think it is reasonable to expect that enough will be able to find either gainful employment in the “judeoconomy” or social safety nets given emerging conditions.  They will have certain skills that they learned during their training and experience fighting urban insurgency and they will fall back on those skills when faced with the stark contrast between a statesman who follows his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and a bunch of blatant traitors who hold the reigns of power without any sort of honor.

Posted by Frank McGuckin on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:01 | #

James

Here is something to think about. Suppose the drought in the South is worse next summer than the summer past. Good chance that there will be building moratoriums in the South. (if they are really insane, they will contiune build.) Housing prices go up. Possibly, The NYC White cop or fireman who has just retired can’t benfit from a price disequlibrium like his buddies did a few years back and retire in Weddington /Waxhaw NC ,watch sports contribute to global warming with significant methane production and send the wife out to work as a hair stylist. Drought continues for five more years. Cop or Fireman stuck in a NYC suburb surround by alien cultures and nigs hitting on his teen age daughter.

The fundamental question is whether you think Whites will fight back.  This depends on what kind of assumptions you make about what White Americans are willing to put up with.

I am taking great satisfaction is seeing how Ron Paul is causing serious trauma for the perverted antiwar/pro-immigration lefties.

The kike Dan Abrams was insulting Lou Dobbs last night. Kike Abrams very likely doesn’t like Lou Dobbs because Dobbs opposes illegal spic immigration. Some kikes will keep at it to the bitter end.

Interesting to see with each passing year Jews through inter - marriage are dissolving themselves ino the White Amerian Christian population through marriage. They have done their damage and now it is time to hide.

Posted by GT on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:17 | #

JB writes: ... when I say “military” I’m not thinking of the typical Ron Paul supporters but more of military veterans—most probably returned from Iraq.  Many of these guys are in a different mental configuration due to their experiences “over there”.

Without the logistics provided by infrastructure and the coordination provided by command these Iraq war veterans are <u>almost</u> as helpless as RP’s cyber-activists.  Rebels lacking coordination and logistical support are “warriors.”  Soldiers fight as machines, warriors fight alone.  Furthermore, without political legitimacy (as defined by the regime) the rebellious veterans become “criminals” and “terrorists,” which increases the inhospitality of the environment.  Near-universal inhospitality maximizes the time spent evading and minimizes the effective application of force.

Despite the martial skills of the veteran the regime’s military, para-military, and legal machinery will terrorize and murder his friends and family, then track him down and dispose of him in a way that maximizes the regime’s political capital.  The result is an unnecessary loss: not because the angry veteran gave his life, but because his effectiveness was minimal.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:14 | #

GT, I can understand your concern for the waste of good men implied by a poorly structured insurgency but you have to compare the “inhospitality” of the environment you are talking about to the “inhospitality” of the peace facing the vet.  I think you may underestimate how hostile the peace has become to our young men.

Posted by GT on Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:17 | #

Rather than pissing on the angry veteran for his participation in the Iraq War we should beckon, socialize, acquire, and train him so that his anger is put to productive use.  If we fail to do this, the regime will certainly do so in our stead and he will be used against us in some future military or paramilitary capacity.  Although we haven’t an alternate infrastructure in place at this time, is in his and our interests to remain open to him.  I believe that a substantial subset of young veterans and junior law enforcement will sympathize, if not support us immediately, once we have demonstrated socioeconomic viability and have acquired a credible measure of political legitimacy in the hinterlands.

Posted by GT on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:53 | #

JB writes: I think you may underestimate how hostile the peace has become to our young men.

Not at all – I am merely being realistic.  The past 50 years has shown that we can expect few to zero rebel “insurgents” because the peace of “benign” slavery in a materialistic society that ends in the destruction of one’s genetic profile at some unforeseeable time in the future is more hospitable and less stressful than the prospect of constant evasion and certain death in an environment lacking any form of logistical support outside of what one can take or rape.  For insurgent or soldier the most hostile environment is one that denies him support – companions, the occasional girl, a few hours of sleep, cigarettes, ammunition, etc.  In any case a successful insurgency must be supported by infrastructure capable of delivering sustained and effective force.  We haven’t an infrastructure at present and are unlikely to build one which meets our needs from within the framework of the judeoconomy.  Given our unique environment, history, and lateness of date we should go outside the judeoconomy and build an independent political, social, economic, and yes, military infrastructure capable of supporting both soldiery and insurgents.

I see this happening.

It takes discipline and dedication.

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 03:22 | #

Rather than pissing on the angry veteran for his participation in the Iraq War we should beckon, socialize, acquire, and train him so that his anger is put to productive use…

I agree.

For insurgent or soldier the most hostile environment is one that denies him support

You bring up the word “insurgent” multiple times.  I mentioned the word “insurgency” once as a proper insurgency (as opposed to a “poorly structured insurgency” which we agree would currently obtain)—not to describe the situation in which the young warrior would find himself but part of his experience “over there” which would put him into a different mental configuration. 

In any case, you are frequently confusing “is” with “ought” here.

I am addressing “is” within this post even as I understand the desire of others to address “ought”.  That’s fine but let’s not get confused.  The situation “is” that the last 50 years are different in some very important ways from the current circumstances and the Ron Paul movement is the most obvious evidence of this difference.  The situation “is” that some young warriors may not give two hoots about your “ought”.  The situation “is” that they are likely to run across some young women who, like the young women who get turned on by criminals, are turned on by anti-war warriors.  The situation “is” that they may find more “support”—however terminal—by committing acts of “home grown terrorism” within an anti-war movement than they can find within their designated role as a scapegoat for the evils of the world.

The basic problem is that Jewish virulence has put into motion mechanisms that cannot be switched off despite it being “good for the Jews” to do so now that the overextension of Jewish phenotypes via mass media is challenged by the new Gutenberg revolution.

Posted by Duncan Tyyne on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:17 | #

What has the Old Media done to our brethren in New Hamphire (a lilly-white state, if I’m not mistaken)?  They have selected quite possibly the biggest turds from either party as candidates.  What was it about Mad Bomber McKennedy that made him appeal to a quasi-libertarian state?  What was it about the Witch, for that matter?

At least Ron Paul destroyed Giuliani in Iowa.

Posted by Matra on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:02 | #

At least Ron Paul destroyed Giuliani in Iowa.

And Guiliani got his revenge, via supporter James Kirchick, in the TNR article that seems to mark the end of the ‘Ron Paul Revolution’.  It was not the ‘Old Media Beast’ but the conservative/libertarian blogosphere that played up this story all day. Now many of RP’s most prominent supporters are disillusioned even shocked (Andrew Sullivan). Below is an example of the many libertarian responses at Reason:

We cannot just take a message and forget the messenger that bears it. There are other, smarter, more eloquent, less damaged libertarian federalists around. Yet, so many libertarians put all their chips in this one man, despite the warnings and less-than-ideal packaging.

And what’s more, the TNR article doesn’t even tie into the fact that this “libertarian” is as anti-immigration as any candidate still in the race—perhaps moreso—which (coincidentally?) disproportionately affects brown people.

I don’t know if he’s a bigot or not…and I don’t care. As a messenger of liberty, he was a liability and now libertarians are paying the price whether we jumped on the wagon or not.

Trying to please both the open borders libertarians and paleocons, never mind WNists, is not easy to do.

RP didn’t help himself during the ABC weekend debate. When asked a question specifically about immigration he gave a brief response then started on about inflation and monetary policy! Of course, his approach was aracial from the start - how could it be anything else within the GOP?

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:09 | #

As I said:

If Ron Paul is, indeed, getting nearly zero old media coverage in NH (by rights he should be getting at LEAST 10% of the total air time allocated to Republican candidates—given his Iowa showing, and more given the value NH puts on independents with which Ron Paul showed strength in Iowa) then it doesn’t really matter how well or badly he does there—Old Media becomes a military target.  The only question is when will military action be taken.

I really should revise this statement now that the winner is shown to be McCain:  It does matter how much Ron Paul loses to McCain since McCain not only is the most hawkish of the Republican field, he is also the greatest Republican recipient of votes from “independents” which are so numerous in New Hampshire.  This does aggravate the situation.

Posted by Matra on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:11 | #

What has the Old Media done to our brethren in New Hamphire (a lilly-white state, if I’m not mistaken)?

Both Iowa and New Hampshire are very white by American standards. According to the MSM Obama was particularly popular with young whites in both states. The appeal of John McCain among so many Independents, and even Mike Huckabee, should dispel the notion that New Hampshire is pro-liberty and sympathetic to ‘mavericks’. I guess that libertarian Free State Project didn’t work out so well.

Posted by Matra on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:15 | #

McCain not only is the most hawkish of the Republican field, he is also the greatest Republican recipient of votes from “independents”

That might also explain Hillary beating Obama. ‘Barry’ was expected to pick up independent voters but it seems McCain snapped up quite a few of them thus helping Hillary.

Posted by Duncan Tyyne on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:11 | #

Trying to please both the open borders libertarians and paleocons, never mind WNists, is not easy to do.

This is certainly true, but probably unnecessary in RP’s case.  With regards to immigration, he shouldn’t have had to please the open borders libertarians.  The immigration control he advocates is supported by a vast majority of the American population and virtually all of his paleocon base (if anything, they would say he doesn’t go far enough). 

As for WNists: if RP and other libertarians took power and actually stuck to their principles of noninterventionism, sound money, low/no taxes, and freedom of association, they wouldn’t have to please us either.  We could manage to please ourselves (yes, I am aware of how ridiculously wrong that looks!).

And about Reason: I subscribed to it for a year while I was in school and considered myself a libertarian, and I very quickly became disillusioned.  Sappy pro-Mestizo articles that put even the MSM to shame, support of race-replacement at every opportunity, neoconnish hatred of Russia (I’m thinking “Cathy Young” here), and a general favoritism towards garbage mass culture just because it’s delivered by the “free market.”  Ron Paul is too old and too white for them.  Reason will not be satisfied until a half-black, half-Filipino transsexual drug addict anchor baby who happens to like guns runs for President.

And Guiliani got his revenge, via supporter James Kirchick, in the TNR article that seems to mark the end of the ‘Ron Paul Revolution’.

I hope it’ll take more than a TNR article written by a pimple-faced loser to sink the Ron Paul Revolution.  But given how hung up just about everyone is about “racism,” you might be right.

Posted by GT on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:13 | #

Has anybody seen this?

Rapture Cultists for Huckabee in Iowa

http://usatoday.feedroom.com/?fr_story=b073ef9dbd9465966c31e387964b37a200f827d4&rf=sitemap

Posted by GT on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:21 | #

Some comments on C-Span’s review of the candidates’ New Hampshire election night events, fwiw:

The Ron Paul campaign is showing signs of intelligent life, but the feel was less “RP in 2008” than it was “The Movement.”  Of course, that Movement is still defining itself and I don’t think the process will be finished in 2008. 

Nevertheless the RP crowd was all quite young and lean.  Thank goodness somebody had the wit to flank Ron Paul with a late 20’s White man and girl.  The latter was a very, very good-looking blonde.  Obese Amerikwans stood out in the other campaigns.

Cultists of the non-movement take note:  RP was not casting himself as “Der Fuhrer.”  More like Herr Doktor in the university professor sense – or even Herr Doktor Emeritus.  No *I* was present.  The emphasis was on *we,* which RP transitions into a collective *you* - as in, “you achieved this” and “I was skeptical early in the campaign.”

Bill Richard’s event was “After Aztlan,” complete with the people.  McCain was an exercise in John McCain’s ego.  Unlike the other candidates there were no other people visible with McCain at the podium while he was speaking.  There was just John McCain against a background that had “John McCain” printed on it multiple times.

Grobama showcased our worst nightmare of ‘The Kwa.’  It was just one big collection of Negroes, deracinated Whites and sexual degenerates.

John Edwards was a perfect Hollywood image of the Democratic Party in 2008 with echoes of Clinton in 1992, as viewed from 1968.

Posted by GT on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:39 | #

JB writes: In any case, you are frequently confusing “is” with “ought” here.

As are you.  Shall we agree to disagree?

Posted by GT on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:43 | #

The message is really quite simple:

1.  Walking neighborhoods for Ron Paul – something my sons have done once or twice weekly from the git-go – is fundamental to “stalking” the Old Media.  The Internet is simply no substitute for physical interaction.
2.  Physical interaction, leadership, and manual labor are essential to building infrastructure.
3.  The direct/indirect encouragement of youngsters – veteran or civilian – to take out Old Media talking-heads without the benefit of infrastructure and command in “lone wolf” fashion is something the SPLC/ADL/JOG would do.

Posted by Maguire on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:02 | #

“via supporter James Kirchick”

i.e. another sodomite Zionist Jew columnist, widely published in the Jews’ media.  Pardon me, I meant to type ‘Conservative Republican’ there.  I’m so sorry. 

The goal of Kirchick’s piece is not to stop Paul from being nominated.  He isn’t going to be.  It’s to provide a reason to stop Paul from speaking on university campuses.

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:16 | #

GT, there is some scientific support for precinct walking from Yale University:

Good old fashioned door-to-door canvassing seems to be the clear winner when compared with nonpartisan phone calls and direct mailings. If $1.50 is the cost per personal contact (10 contacts per hour at $15 per hour), then we estimate approximately one more voter is “delivered” for each $8 spent. In contrast, at fifty cents per mailer, sending three mailings to each household (containing an average of 1.5 voters) nets roughly one additional voter for each $40 spent. Our bottom line advice is, think very carefully about how you allocate your GOTV resources - phone banks and mailings may seem cheaper upon first glance, but our research shows that intensive canvassing is actually far more cost-effective.

My concern is that the requirements of local human ecology establishment may be sufficiently different from GOTV canvassing as to require some additional validation of the methodology.  To that end I would advise anyone engaged in this effort to be not only creative regarding their unique community and the unique character of the Ron Paul movement, but to document their method of contacting people, its variations and have some way of measuring the effectiveness on scales that matter—which really means more than “$/vote”.  We have a problem, of course, in that the scientific results will need to be “published” by persons, many of whom must by practical necessity remain anonymous which places the reported results at more risk of fraud, so this must be taken into account when interpreting the reported results of these methods.

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:48 | #

By the way, there is at least one county that Ron Paul won: Jefferson County, Iowa—and some supporters attribute that win to a series of ads placed in the local newspaper.

We can argue against this as “supplying the enemy”—particularly if there is evidence the local newspaper is owned and/or run by the enemy, but it is a real reported result.

Posted by Jean West on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:49 | #

The entire campaign is saturated with Jews.  Some of the active Jewish players have been Frank Luntz, James Kirchik, New Republic, NYTimes, Fox, Richard Haass, Frank Gaffney, Norman Podhoretz + 6 more Jews (Giuiliani advisors), Obama’s credentials:
http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13849&Itemid=86

None of this is new—just more visible.  Many RP supporters see “the CFR” as The Enemy; the word Jew is never mentioned.  Coincidentally, all three of the people on the NH Ron Paul list about whom I expressed suspicion posted within 10 minutes of each other the day after the primary under the subject line:  Yep, we been robbed!  Two of them had not posted for months before that, and they were the only three who posted that day.  Which may mean nothing.

My questions are these:

1.  Is there any way that we (racialists, nationalists, etc) can use this disillusionment in the huge Ron Paul “movement” to our mutual advantage?

2.  What might we in NH do in follow-up to the results here.  For example, I have a whole Folder FILLED TO THE BRIM with files on John McCain covering ALL of his faults.  Would it be a better use of time and energy for the NH group to focus on educating NH residents about the candidates they voted for, than to follow the campaign to other states?

3.  I’ve criticized the non-use of the RP money and the number and quality of the ads that have been shown or broadcast.  I have reservations about donating more money.  And yet, merely keeping RP in the race is worthwhile.  So I will donate again.

4.  I was interested that one person on a Ron Paul forum posted his observation that there seemed to be something going on with the Giuliani/Paul numbers during the ongoing vote displays on television.  I had noticed the same thing.  In fact, at one point, I grabbed my calculator and managed to get 4 of the displays calculated—I was hoping for a clear algorithm—not quite, but close and my sample was only four pairs within about 10 minutes:  Ron Paul’s # plus between 1.109 and 1.136.  But throughout, ALWAYS Giuiliani was a few hundred votes ahead of Paul—it never happened EVEN ONCE that Paul at some particular point in the voting was a few points ahead of Giuiliani.  I think it’s interesting that my brain became aware of this, and only then did I consciously pay attention.

JW

Posted by Maguire on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:15 | #

James,

“We can argue against this as “supplying the enemy”—particularly if there is evidence the local newspaper is owned and/or run by the enemy, but it is a real reported result.”

It could also be a coincidence arising from an overall superior county RP organization and execution.  That is, both the newspaper ad and the plurality vote were effects of a prior cause.  Is any more known about RP campaign activity in Jefferson County, IA?

Maguire

Posted by AlmostMusicPhD on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:39 | #

“Furthermore, without political legitimacy (as defined by the regime) the rebellious veterans become “criminals” and “terrorists,” which increases the inhospitality of the environment….”

The American War for Independence had their heroes called ‘criminals,’ too.

I, for one, would not deny a full, all-out arising of the Enraged White Man,  as being a VERY distinct possibility- to deny such a view is a ‘head-in-the-sand’ mentality. As to the idea that they are leaderless, and therefore, ‘less viable’ as a means to ‘effect change,’ White Leaders will naturally rise to the top; police will not fight their own racial kin, once they realize that all the diversity cr*p they have been taught via the ADL’s brainwashing ‘seminar’s’ is/are serving to line only ONE group’s psychic (and actual) pockets.

Frankly, I am surprised the exclusion of Dr. Paul from rational debate is not arising a very vocal sentiment that would believe/act on the premise: if EITHER “Hitlery” or the “Obamanation” is elected, they will not make it to Inauguration Day- an ‘accident’ will ‘just happen,’ to avoid the shame of EITHER ONE being ‘elected’ (by the Jewsmedia to rule over the ‘Sheeople’).

If pundits on the right are seeing the fact that the CFR, Bilderburgers, ADL, FedRes types would find a ‘convenient’ way to ‘get rid of Dr. Paul’  to avoid giving up their ill-gotten power, in light of his consistent constitutionalism, the same can be said for the other side of the fence.

It would go something like this: Neither Democrat front-runner SHOULD be president… therefore, neither Democratic front-runner WILL be president; and such an outcome will be averted, ‘by any means necessary’... that sort of rationale.  And don’t say there isn’t that strong a level of disgust and overt hatred on the part of whites ready to take back their country, while they see Muslims, Blacks and other third world illegals swamping places like the Upper Midwest, and Maine! How stupid do the ruling elite think their minions are, when we have a higher concentration of university educated minions, in the first place? You can only power shop for so long, before it pales in light of rational thought on the issues….

Not that I am advocating being involved in such a scenario… but the anger on web site chat boards I have visited, is beyond palpable. It is visceral, real, and this Hannity scene (deleted from YouTube- THAT’s how scared they are!) is just a foretaste of the “Revolution” growing. Why do you think the Ron Paul campaign staged two events, clearly tied in with iconic images of overlords grown fat on the backs of poor Whites, that are redolent of ANOTHER ‘Revolution’? Like my son says, “Duh!” And no, it is not Ron Paul that is orchestrating it, like the incessant propaganda of bilious minds like Michael Medved, and others of his ilk, would have us believe. I am actually hopeful the “jewsmedia” is becoming like the ‘man behind the curtain’ in Wizard of Oz- shown just who he REALLY is- a fraud, a huckster, a charlatan.

It is the honest revulsion of the destruction of this country, in favor of some ‘noachide law’ Talmudistan, that is fueling this anger. And you know what they say, “Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come!”

Whether or not a person like that (who would be the powderkeg that would set off the next stage in the ‘revolution’) would be lauded as a Washington - or as a John Wilkes Booth- all depends on how deeply the dis-satisfation of Whites against a co-opted country has arisen to…..and who will wrest control of the Jewsmedia, ‘come the revolution.’

‘Never forgive, never forget,’ they say. Well, two can play at that game…and please don’t tell us,  you didn’t know that was ‘fair’ and ‘inclusive’?

Yeah, right.  (Why do I hear the phrase ‘some pigs are more equal than others’ ringing in my head?)

Posted by AlmostMusicPhD on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:47 | #

Those smileys were not my choice. My typing of quotation marks, etc. seemed to generate them. Shows you how a non-computer savvy person can say things not intended. Like, “What is ‘is’?”

Posted by AlmostMusicPhD on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:53 | #

http://www.rense.com/general79/rebel.htm

This is what I was alluding to, about those power shoppers.

Posted by Jean West on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:06 | #

James wrote:
“By the way, there is at least one county that Ron Paul won: Jefferson County, Iowa—and some supporters attribute that win to a series of ads placed in the local newspaper.  We can argue against this as “supplying the enemy”—particularly if there is evidence the local newspaper is owned and/or run by the enemy, but it is a real reported result.”

Maguire seems to understand what he means.  Whereas, I have no idea.

Can someone explain?

One fraud is confirmed:  31 persons in the small town of Sutton, NH, where votes were hand-counted, voted for Ron Paul.  But throughout the election returns and right up to the final tally, Sutton displayed -0- votes for Ron Paul, as in zero.

JW

Posted by VLC on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:52 | #

Murdoch is the one who deserves a bullet, Hannity is just a puppet. Une tarte a la creme would be enough for this clown

Posted by VLC on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:56 | #

(I was referring to the first comment: “They missed a good chance to kill him ...”)

Posted by VLC on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 19:03 | #

Matra:
“Now many of RP’s most prominent supporters are disillusioned even shocked (Andrew Sullivan)”

it’s an old story, I believe the newsletter thing came out in April or May. The homo jew who wrote the update in TNR just dug a little deeper to get a few more “horrible” quotes. Paul allowed others to use his name thinking they would write like him and he said he took ‘moral responsability’ for that mistake. He said among other things that he was sorry about the jabs at Barbara Jordan (the black victimologist) because he and het got along well when they worked together. (But I bet he got more donations when he sent salty un-PC newsletters, that’s the truth he doesn’t want to tell)

If some Paul fans are ready to vote for a candidate (D or R, it doesn’t matter) who has no problems with killing thousands of american soldiers and start wars for Israel, wants to give amnesty to all illegals and keep on destroying civil liberties because of a few un-politically correct newsletters they’re a bunch of sissies. If the ACLU can work with Bob Barr libertardians can certainly work with Paul.

and Jamie Slurpdick wrote that Paul is a frequent guest on the Alex Jones show. As in “Hoooooooo, he gives interviews to Alex Jones, my G-D!”. Paul Craig Roberts, Reagan’s former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, appears on that show too. Larry Pratt the head of Gun Owners of America is a regular guest. Greg Palast a (leftist) reporter for The Guardian(UK) is somewhat of a regular I believe. I’ve heard the son of E.Howard Hunt talk about his father’s confession. Appearing on the AJ radio show doesn’t mean much. He apparently has a large audience anyway.

Paul gave an interview to VDare.com in which he talked about national sovereignty and illegal immigration, you know the big bad evil racist website where Michelle Malkin has a column. Does that make Paul a racist ? I wondey why Kirchick didn’t use that one: Look look! he gave an interview to VDare.com !! VDare is a racist website!

and Sullivan is just an homosexual political dandy. He prefers McCain, someone who said he would started the war in Iraq anyway and wants to bomb Iran, over Paul and he prefers Obama over McCain because he said (on the Colbert show) that having a black president would appease the arabs and make the US looks better. The guy is a joke

and Libertarianism is a self-destructive delusion. fck libertarians. They’re the biggest joke

Posted by GT on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 19:47 | #

Maguire wrote : It could also be a coincidence arising from an overall superior county RP organization and execution.  That is, both the newspaper ad and the plurality vote were effects of a prior cause.  Is any more known about RP campaign activity in Jefferson County, IA?

Jean West asked: Maguire seems to understand what he means.  Whereas, I have no idea.  Can someone explain?

Superior organization and execution on the ground may have had a greater effect in delivering the vote for Ron Paul in Jefferson County, IA, than the newspaper ad, but that there is no way to verify it.  That is why Maguire is asking if anybody can provide details about RP campaign activities in Jefferson County – sort of like what you did for Ron Paul’s New Hampshire activities in another thread.

Posted by GT on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:14 | #

Change: but that there is no way to verify it.
To: but there is no way to verify it.

Posted by Jean West on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:19 | #

I don’t know what worked in Jefferson, Iowa, but here are comments from an activist in NH.  This is the first paragraph.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=85242

1:49 PM
mackler

Some first-hand observations from NH—PLEASE LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES!!!

Dear Friends, Having spent the last few weeks in New Hampshire, I am quite disturbed by what I saw. I am sad and upset that we let the rest of the country down, and most especially that we let Dr. Paul down. I pray to God that enough people will learn from what went wrong there to do the right thing in other states. Here are some important lessons I wish to share:

[9 lessons and a Summary with Suggestions]

Posted by Matra on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:44 | #

The goal of Kirchick’s piece is not to stop Paul from being nominated.  He isn’t going to be.  It’s to provide a reason to stop Paul from speaking on university campuses.

It was also to stop RP from getting his message out over the media. Already, he has got less coverage on MSM since the Kirchick article. Furthermore, when he does get the rare MSM interview he’ll be forced to waste valuable air time answering questions about the supposedly awful newsletter quotes attributed to him.

Another reason for the piece was to create dissension within RP’s ranks. It has certainly done that. There’s now a push on for the author of the politically incorrect quotes to come forward so RP and the ‘movement’ don’t take the fall for his words. (The author is widely rumoured to be Lew Rockwell)

On the subject of campaign funds I’m bewildered by the apparent refusal of the RP campaign to spend much money in a state widely seen as being crucial in building momentum. Do RP’s people have some other plans for the money: a third party candidacy? An all out advertising blitz in a particular state? Political infrastructure resource money for the future? Anyone know what the plan is?

It is visceral, real, and this Hannity scene (deleted from YouTube- THAT’s how scared they are!) is just a foretaste of the “Revolution” growing.

The anger was real, and understandable, but it wasn’t very smart. It was a political ‘own goal’ that reinforced the media image of RP supporters being crazies and kooks.

One other problem for RP is the stupidity and/or lack of seriousness of many voters. We know all about the media’s role in this but the media can’t be blamed for the news that John McCain got more of the one third of GOP primary voters who claimed to be anti-war than any other candidate.

Posted by Jean West on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:55 | #

One person sent an email to more than a dozen lists with the Subject line:  James Kirchik has “ADMITTED” he’s a liar!!

I posted this response:
___________

Why do you distribute Mr. Kirchick’s words all over the Internet?

The particular smears that have been made against Ron Paul should have been expected and ignored.

Haven’t we seen this over and over again?

It wouldn’t happen over and over again if it wasn’t so successful in evoking Pavlovian panic responses.

Solution:  desensitize.  Refuse to react to words like “racist,” “anti-semite,” “homophobic,” “neo-nazi.”

Their purpose is to shut people up, weaken people’s support, divide and conquer, SO THEY CAN CONTROL.

Do not allow this to work.  It’s simple.  Don’t react.

___________________________________

It remains to be seen if my response gets posted.

Posted by Jean West on Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:06 | #

Sorry Jean but I do not agree with you.  Because of this and other internet reports about him, Drudge pulled the article from his website and the MSM literally buried it.
I will continue to take it to these SOBs every chance I get…...every way I can.
Y
____________________________

Well, maybe I’m wrong and “Y” is right.  It’s not going away.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/

Does that mean they’re still not sure he’s dead?

JW

Posted by Matra on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:46 | #

With all this talk about a candidate’s ‘racism’ one opinionated person is noticeably absent from the conversation. It’s not all that surprising but worth noting nonetheless.

Posted by D.E. Johnson on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:52 | #

Well, maybe I’m wrong and “Y” is right.  It’s not going away.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/

Does that mean they’re still not sure he’s dead?

JW
Posted by Jean West on Thursday, January 10, 2008 at 10:06 PM | #

Not necessarily, for if anything, they have proven that they have no aversion to beating a horse, even after it is dead.  They are going to keep this stuff in the limelight from now on, facts notwithstanding, in order to prevent anyone, anywhere, from ever being able to use the RP support network for other, more promising purposes.  These accusations evince the intended Pavlovian response in the majority of RP supporters, most of whom have been trained to flee in terror from anything that even remotely resembles an attempt to enforce their autonomy.

Posted by VLC on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:17 | #

from the RP forum link:

You may have trouble believing this, but I was amazed at how many people had to pause for thought when asked whether they wanted a Republican or Democratic ballot. I heard many people say, “ummm….oh I guess I’ll take a democratic ballot. I really don’t know who I’m voting for.” I’m not making this up.

Posted by GT on Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:28 | #

VNN provides link to New Republic, which has more selections from Ron Paul’s newsletter:
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=54586159-12be-442c-810d-020982d8becb