Rudy is so done.
In a story that should shake up the GOP field in a major way, the Politico’s Ben Smith nails Rudy for criminally expensing his affairs to the taxpayers of New York City.
As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records.
I’ve said it befor. The R’s will pick Romney and he will get trounced. (Sorry Ron Paul fans. The media narrative is that he is nuts.)
Rudy fans may use the comment section to point out the fact that Clinton got a blow job.
Please consider contributing on the 16th of December.
Ron Paul needs the publicity of another big fund raising day.
I’m a veteran of the U.S. Air Force active duty (4yrs) and I currently serve as a traditional guardsman in the Air National Guard. All military personnel upon enlistment take the oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” A vote for Rep. Paul does just that. Ron Paul has my support.
There is an obvious media bias and it is sad. Rep. Paul is the one candidate of the crowd who has substantially differing views and he was not given much of a chance to articulate those views. Much time was given to marginal issues and small differences between other candidates’ positions on the issues. I suspect many special interest groups have much to lose if a President Paul had a chance to use his veto pen. This is reflected in the lack of time given to Rep. Paul.
Oh my, which way to go? Follow the threads original intent, and make a joke at the expense of Giuliani, or follow the seriousness of the first comment and go with Ron Paul. Since Ron reaches back to what this country is made of and Giuliani is all fluff, I will drop my joke and pursue the Ron thread…..
If the media thinks Ron is nuts……And
We all think the media is nuts…….Then
probably Ron and us think alike……
Who listens to what the media says anyway? That is how Delaware got so screwed up, listening to our Ron: Ron Williams……Duh…….Americans do not think Ron Paul is misguided. Just the opposite. They think the corporate influenced media has hijinxed all three branches of the governmental process, so that financial decisions are made out of corruption and not out of the benefit for all Americans.
Only Ron Paul on the Republican’s, or Joe Biden on the other side, can rectify that perception…..
Yeah, but Clinton….
Kavips,
As a Dean supporter it is all too clear to me what the media is doing to Ron Paul and why they are doing it.
It don’t like it I’m simnply saying that it is a fact that the narrative is that he is nuts and nothing is going to change that.
Instead it is only going become a bigger and bigger part of the story until thte day when Paul mispeaks (or slips on a patch of ice) (or gets cake frosting on the tip of his nose) and it will be allllllll over then.
Because that picture or audio comment will be everywhere and the national versions of Ron Williams will say “See!”
Ron Paul will not be good for our government plain and simple. He has a disdain for the government and its’ employees that is well documented….
sorry just because he wants out of Iraq doesn’t mean he will be good for our country.
I thought last night’s debate, leaving Ron Paul out of it, was the most manipulated pathetic load of crap I have yet witnessed in a national presidential debate. CNN sickens me and Anderson Cooper is about as credible in my mind as Bill O’Reilly from his Current Affair days. Thousands of YouTube videos sent and they pick the most banal wacky weirdos mumbling out bizarre questions all about God, guns, and gays. *wretch*. McCain has totally lost it…revisiting the wisdom of VietNam?!?
Speaking of current affairs, Rudy’s smarmy, scummy background is beginning to make the Clinton’s look like angels. Whoever said that a Giuliani White House would eclipse the Clintons’ in terms of personal corruption and scandal was understating the case. At least Bill Clinton didn’t pretend to be some scion of “law and order” like the vaunted lawyer/prosecutor Rudy. What a worm.
The best way to bitch slap the elitist corporate media with their now-blatant ambushing of Ron Paul is to VOTE RON PAUL. The more they try to ridicule or marginalize Paul, the more support he will gain and the more fervent will be his supporters to work even harder. He has another “money bomb” scheduled for 12/16 to commemorate the Boston Tea Party.
Well, if the media experiences anything like I’ve experienced when I’ve said negative things about Ron Paul, they might be inclined just to ignore him and not attack him. Unless, that is, they want to experience personal attacks, invectives, being accused of Stalinism, Maoism, and even harassing phone calls. Many of Paul’s supporters defend him not through debate about his positions but through online and offline thuggery. There is something of the jackboot to many of them.
But here is an idea that Paul has proffered that I find troubling. He wants to revoke the constitutional amendment that allows the people to directly elect their senators to the federal government. He wants to return to the way the founders who, in one of the examples of their irresistible elitism, envisaged the state legislatures electing the senators.
Besides being an awfully undemocratic suggestion, I can think of a two word reason why the idea would be a calamity: Thurman Adams.
I’m sure no further explanation is needed.
Might I offer an alternative to Ron Paul? I think there may be some democrats worth looking at.
By comparing Paul to Dean I don’t want to give anyone the impression that I like Paul. I just see a similar dynamic in play.
kip – I like your blog.
I don’t know that criticizing Ron Paul’s supporters while complaining that they criticize his opponents is exactly consistent. As vicious as some people have been toward Paul and his supporters, is it any wonder they strike back?
I agree that Paul is totally wrong about repealing the direct election of senators. This is an area in which his adherence to federalism as the founders precisely envisioned it goes too far.
Oddly, though, I doubt it would produce any different result in Delaware since the same people get elected over and over again, scratching each others’ backs in the process, D and R alike, top to bottom.
Kip,
Are you a Delaware blogger?
Let’s not even discuss Rudy’s penchant to do business with TERRORIST FINANCIERS!
Might I offer an alternative to Ron Paul? I think there may be some democrats worth looking at.
*
🙂
I am just hope Rudy is done.
I got this from a friend this morning and thought you guys and gals would love it. Have a field day:
http://www.democrats.org/page/content/FlipperTV/
It is easy to attack Ron Paul. He looks funny. His sentences do not fit into neat soundbites. It’s just easy pickin.
The message of less government interference resonates though. I think some of the Dems could find a way to embrace much of his message and increase their popularity.
I mean Dems just have to love some of this:
http://www.zombietime.com/sf_anti-war_rally_oct_27_2007/the_republican_anti-war_march/
To Jason/Dana:
Your comparison of Ron Paul to Dean is apt. At the core of both their campaigns, reside the same group of people. For lack of a better term one could call them “reformers”. If they were around in ’91 they probably were part of the 1/5 of the electorate who voted for Perot….
I assume you are referring to the “screech” and as I remember personally, it was not big deal when it happened live…”Oh he momentarily lost his voice in the cold January rain.” However the nest morning and for days afterwards it was….
So the question remains on how Ron Paul supporters are to respond when the media picks up an incident and runs with “See….?”
And the correct response, which needs to be unified among all of Ron Paul’s reformers, is the single answer to which there is no response, reply, or rebuttal…..
And that answer is “So,….?”
Then continue doing what you are doing…..Had Dean supporters en masse followed this tactic, quite possibly Dean would have appeared Teflon coated and strong against the press, as he approached the next round of primaries. Instead his mousy apologies and waffling supporters, made voters think for a second “Uh,… he does seem to be a second tier candidate,” and step into the voting booth thinking “not this time around.”
“It is not the accusation that condemns; it is ones response.”
No, I’m not a Delaware-ian, just like your blog. I think the allusion to Perot is pretty good.
“But here is an idea that Paul has proffered that I find troubling. He wants to revoke the constitutional amendment that allows the people to directly elect their senators to the federal government. He wants to return to the way the founders who, in one of the examples of their irresistible elitism, envisaged the state legislatures electing the senators.”
Hi Dana, ask Tyler about that issue. I just hope Rudy is as done as you guys think he is. After listening to the debate last night, I am not so sure he won’t try to leverage his ego with money from his terrorist financiers.
“No, I’m not a Delaware-ian, just like your blog. I think the allusion to Perot is pretty good.”
Kip,
This blog isn’t mine. But if you like this one, you’ll find that mine is akin to Nirvana.
It would be interesting, perhaps in some alternate quantum universe, to have Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton as the nominees, in which case we might well see many of our friends on the left vote for Mr Paul.
And then, over the next four years, the alternate quantum universe Dana would be taunting our friends on the left, saying, “You should have been careful about what you asked for, ’cause now you’ve got it!”
As for Mr Paul’s preference that the 17th Amendment be repealed, I’d suggest that the 15th, 16th and 19th need to go as well. The Framers had things quite right when they restricted the franchise to white male property owners.
November 29, 2007- A MESSAGE FROM OUR LEADER RUDY:
“We look upon authority too often and focus over and over again, for 30 or 40 or 50 years, as if there is something wrong with authority. We see only the oppressive side of authority. Maybe it comes out of our history and our background. What we don’t see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.
[ Interruption by someone in the audience. ]
You have free speech so I can be heard.”
“As for Mr Paul’s preference that the 17th Amendment be repealed, I’d suggest that the 15th, 16th and 19th need to go as well. The Framers had things quite right when they restricted the franchise to white male property owners.”
Dana, I think you have it all wrong.
“It would be interesting, perhaps in some alternate quantum universe, to have Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton as the nominees, in which case we might well see many of our friends on the left vote for Mr Paul.”
You’ll never see this lefty supporting Paul. I’ve read beyond his presidential campaign rhetoric and the correct cant about getting out of Iraq now and have had a good sample of his past opinions, which he now only alludes to obliquely. For example in last night’s debate he said:
“So it’s not so much a secretive conspiracy, it’s a contest between ideologies, whether we believe in our institutions here, our national sovereignty, our Constitution, or are we going to further move into the direction of international government, more U.N.
You know, this country goes to war under U.N. resolutions. I don’t like big government in Washington, so I don’t like this trend toward international government.”
(Of course, Paul failed to mention the US only goes to war under Security Council resolutions which it has the power to veto. But such an admission doesn’t fit w/ the image he is peddling of the UN lording it over us and making us go to war, when, if anything, nearly the obverse obtains. WE ignore UN resolutions or defeated ones and do as we please.)
That might sound like he wants to depotentiate the UN, an organization that, except for the public forum in which it discusses burgeoning international conflicts, is virtually powerless in any case. But when you read Paul’s past statements you understand precisely what he means: he wants the US to withdraw from the UN.
While that undoubtedly accords with the the longings of antiquarian Americans who pine for an idealized picture of 18th century America, it is a highly irresponsible and reckless view in the 21st century global arena.
Think ICBMs and you’ll immediately understand why Paul is bad for the US and the world.
Think Hillary and you’ll see them for the first time in your life. Again, Dana, talk to Tyler about this. You and he get along so well.
November 29, 2007- A MESSAGE FROM OUR LEADER RUDY:
“We look upon authority too often and focus over and over again, for 30 or 40 or 50 years, as if there is something wrong with authority. We see only the oppressive side of authority. Maybe it comes out of our history and our background. What we don’t see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.
[ Interruption by someone in the audience. ]
You have free speech so I can be heard.”