May 15, 2007

Ron Paul Jumps The Shark

When you start blaming America for 9/11, it is time for you to go. I'm sure that clip will be circulating down here we Texas Republicans look for a credible candidate to unseat him. There is no legitimate justification for 9/11 -- and the fact that Ron Paul argues that there is puts him beyond the pale of the GOP.

At one point, one of Mr. GiulianiÂ’s lesser-known opponents, Representative Ron Paul of Texas, gave what turned out to be a big platform to Mr. Giuliani when he appeared to suggest that the United States invited the attacks of Sept. 11 by having originally invaded Iraq.

“May I comment on that?” Mr. Giuliani said, looking grim. “That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of Sept. 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11.”

Mr. Giuliani was interrupted by cheers and applause. “And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that,” he said.

Ron Paul needs to get out of the presidential race -- and out of the US Congress. And not only that -- the GOP needs to put distance between ourselves and the Kucinich of the Right. I wonder how a resolution rebuking Ron Paul would go over at the next Executive Committee meeting.

MORE AT Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters, Don Surber, Jawa Report, Chatterbox Chronicles, WC Varones, NeoCon Express, GOP3, Wizbang, Flopping Aces, WuzzaDem, The Hill Chronicles

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson's Website, Stuck On Stupid, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 10:55 PM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Ron Paul neither "blamed America" nor implied there was any "justification" for 9/11. 

Paul was talking about how foreign interventionism over half a century has helped foster anti-American sentiment in the middle east.  It was the moderator who started with the "invited it" B.S.; Rudy echoed it, and with nostrils-flaring, successfully painted any analysis of our past foreign policy as "justifying 9/11."  How sad for us.

Posted by: John L at Wed May 16 01:17:22 2007 (pd0Ii)

2 All Ron Paul was trying to say was that the U.S. military presence in the ME is a big part of why Al Qaeda wanted to attack us.  It is a fact that we had troops in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.  To twist this into 'blaming America for 9/11' is just wrong.

Posted by: gregdn at Wed May 16 02:08:42 2007 (jVDxL)

3 Its right there in the 9/11 report.

Its not like Ron Paul said something that the government hasn't already published as a fact in its report.

Posted by: Jason at Wed May 16 03:57:03 2007 (sbV1u)

4 See also:

The Ron Paul Internet Dilemma
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/12850/guest-voice-the-ron-paul-internet-dilemma/

Romney, Paul, Giuliani Won SC Debate - Fox News Viewers
http://hammer2006.blogspot.com/2007/05/romney-paul-giuliani-won-sc-debate-fox.html

VIDEO: Ron Paul vs. Rudy Giuliani
http://hammer2006.blogspot.com/2007/05/video-ron-paul-vs-rudy-giuliani.html

Blog This: Ron Paul Explodes Across Google, Campaign Site, YouTube,
Technorati and more. The mainstream media (MSM) has been ignoring Ron Paul’s spectacular rise (see story for stats and details) across the Internet’s top websites.
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Blog_This_Ron_Paul_Explodes_Across_Google_Campaign_Site_YouTube/blog

Posted by: Alex Hammer at Wed May 16 04:45:24 2007 (kCCW2)

5 "All Ron Paul was trying to say was that the U.S. military presence in the ME is a big part of why Al Qaeda wanted to attack us"

Please learn middle eastern political history before espousing ignorant crap like the statement above. Bin Laden has espoused hatred for the west before we even entered Saudi Arabia or the middle east. His manifesto (constructed in the early 70's) wished to establish Islam throughout the earth and we were the strongest link against any religiouis and political capitulation. First read Bin Laden's political essays, only then can you write/speak with knowlege and coherence.

Posted by: Michele at Wed May 16 09:03:43 2007 (DPFIK)

6 "... the Mujahideen saw the black gang of thugs in the White House hiding the Truth, and their stupid and foolish leader, who is elected and supported by his people, denying reality and proclaiming that we (the Mujahideen) were striking them because we were jealous of them (the Americans), whereas the reality is that we are striking them because of their evil and injustice in the whole of the Islamic World, especially in Iraq and Palestine and their occupation of the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries."

--Osama Bin Laden , February 14, 2003

Yet numerous public opinion polls in the Islamic world repeatedly prove the president wrong. The surveys show that people in Islamic countries admire American political and economic freedoms, culture, and technology. But when Muslims are polled on the level of their approval of U.S. foreign policy, the numbers go through the floor. Much of this negative attitude derives from mindless U.S. backing of anything Israel does. In addition, Osama bin Laden has repeatedly written or stated that he attacks the United States because of its military presence in the Persian Gulf and its support for Israel and corrupt regimes in the Arab world.

--Independent Online, 9/11 Commission Chairmen Admit Whitewashing the Cause of the Attacks, August 7, 2006

Posted by: Rich at Wed May 16 09:28:46 2007 (BTOhN)

7 The problem with Ron Paul's statement, though, is it is coupled with a "Surrender At Any Cost" position. Heck, he opposed any response to 9/11 except isolationism -- not an option in today's world. It is fine to understand our enemy's motive -- so long as it does not interfere with the essential task of slaughtering every last one of the savages.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Wed May 16 13:08:22 2007 (wxjnN)

8 RWR:

Ron Paul's statement is not coupled with a "Surrender At Any Cost", isolationist position.

After 9/11 Paul voted for military action against al-Qaida/Bin Laden and for the money to do so.

Posted by: DAve at Thu May 17 01:54:50 2007 (+ALQE)

9 It seems not only are the Republicans but also the Democrats feeling threatened by the support Ron Paul is getting from the citizens, as my Dad use to say "He is using just plain ole common sense" we cannot interfere with everyone"s country and not be resented for it. I pray that if he does not get on the GOP ticket that we as concerned citizens start a write in policy to get him elected and get these crooks out of the White House.

Posted by: Sandi at Fri May 18 13:00:49 2007 (h/YdH)

10 I just stumbled across this article and had to giggle. Ron Paul clearly did not "Jump the Shark" in mid-May 2007! Popularity has grown greatly since then.

Posted by: UhWhatever! at Fri Nov 30 17:24:46 2007 (Pe/fA)

11 But only among the insane, dude. Relying on the "crazy people" vote to be elected president is a rather weak strategy.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat Dec 1 03:02:39 2007 (mOx/o)

12 I'm insane because I share Ron Paul's libertarian views? I'm sorry if leaving people alone is such a radical and crazy idea, but I believe in everybody's inherent right to basic liberties. An interventionist policy of "get them before they get us again" is just a romanticized version of "shoot first, ask questions later". We all know how well those types of ideologies work out. We end up with no answers to our questions and a mess to clean up including the bodies of several innocent dead. Sure, there are plenty of people who want to do the U.S. harm, and we should seek those individuals and groups out. That, however, doesn't mean that we should occupy every country that we want in search of these people. I hate terrorism and religious extremism as much as the next, but charging into countries with our guns drawn and meddling in the policies of certain nations doesn't do much for our image, and it certainly doesn't give us more powerful allies that would be willing to help us destroy religious extremism.

Posted by: cheesesoda at Tue Dec 4 05:22:04 2007 (nEcZ/)

13 You are nuts for A) Thinking Ron Paul has a chance; B) Thinking that Ron Paul's collection of fruits, nuts, and extremists will do other than drive sane Americans away.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue Dec 4 10:19:31 2007 (mOx/o)

14 DAve, Please show me the vote in which Paul "yay"'d military action and it's funding. Can you provide a link with a record of the vote? I'm interested to see.

Posted by: Tom Toerson at Wed Dec 5 09:02:10 2007 (0LDYa)

15 Well, about 8 months later, I figure I should reply. I never once thought Ron Paul stood a chance. I just feel that it's ridiculous to even suggest that one wagon jump because a candidate doesn't have a chance at winning. It's that irresponsible mentality that keeps America in a two party system and on a course toward tyranny, regardless of what party's behind the wheel. As for driving people away, the Revolution only got stronger, and doesn't really show signs of slowing. Sure, the media is ignoring it, but we all know how the media likes to ignore things it doesn't care for.

Posted by: cheesesoda at Mon Jul 28 12:53:59 2008 (+4Mk1)

Posted by: Semil at Fri Dec 5 12:49:48 2008 (4FNZm)

17 Hi, I'm a new buyer, virtuous registered on your forum. I count for your message, I chose the normal classification - this. warm monicker - rhymeswithright.mu.nu.

Posted by: menOnelve at Tue Jan 13 23:38:57 2009 (iqWqq)

Posted by: ellaelax-wq at Fri Jan 16 16:19:12 2009 (BqKVM)

Posted by: ellaelax-rm at Wed Jan 21 12:44:40 2009 (rkuJ6)

20 Very nice site!

Posted by: John973 at Tue May 5 01:47:07 2009 (uNigH)

Posted by: ellaelax-bv at Tue May 19 11:12:03 2009 (2Fj2a)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
20kb generated in CPU 0.0078, elapsed 0.0189 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0127 seconds, 50 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]