Politics Plus

Only because the rest of the GOP field of Presidential candidates is so terrible, there is actually a possibility that Ron Paul might win the Iowa Caucuses, as he has concentrated almost all his efforts there.  Ron Paul has never mattered, and in all probability, never will.  But just in case, it’s important that you understand that Paul is not the person he presents himself to be, as this excellent article by Tim Murphy clearly demonstrates.

…Paul might just win Iowa. As Red State founder Erick Erickson points out [wing-nuts delinked], he’s worked the state harder than almost anyone else and honed his message to appeal to corn belt conservatives (the raw milk line is a winner). But that doesn’t make him a serious contender. As Politico’s Maggie Haberman and others have pointed out, Paul’s candidacy has a clear ceiling. Until his opponents start talking about the following issues, you’ll know Paul isn’t a serious threat:

The newsletters: Since 1978, Paul published and sold a newsletter (known alternatively as Ron Paul’s Political Report, Ron Paul’s Survival Report, and Ron Paul’s Freedom Report) to tens of thousands of libertarians scattered across the country. Especially in the beginning, it played into the concerns of a certain kind of conservative white guy. As the New Republic reported, the newsletters suggest Paul is "not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing—but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics." Some excerpts:

"[Although] we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

"[B]lack males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary, and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."

Paul defended the newsletters’ racist content when it was first brought up by his opponent in a 1996 congressional race—standing by, for instance, charges that Democratic Rep. Barbara Jordan, the state’s first black congresswoman, was granted favorable treatment because of her race. His statements were "academic, tongue-in-cheek," he said of the newsletters, and were not meant to be taken at face value.

It wasn’t until five years later that Paul offered an alibi, claiming that the newsletters had been ghostwritten. As he told Texas Monthly’s S.C. Gwynne, "They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them…I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn’t come from me directly, but they [campaign aides] said that’s too confusing. ‘It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.’"

It’s a confusing alibi, to say the least: Why would Paul’s campaign prefer he take credit for racist comments he didn’t write? Even if he never wrote the newsletters, he had no qualms profiting off of their contents for decades. The fact that none of his presidential opponents since then have raised the newsletters as an issue is a sign they simply don’t take him seriously…

Inserted from <Mother Jones>

Now, this is just the section in Murphy’s article that deals with Paul’s racism.  In addition Murphy exposes Paul on civil rights, scorched earth policies, conspiracy theories, and women’s rights.  I strongly urge you to click through for the rest of it.

If I had a ghost writer for this blog, and if he wrote overtly racist statements here, I would be screaming about it from day one, disavowing it and firing the ghost writer.  It certainly would not take five years!  That’s why I do not believe Paul.  Furthermore, if I had a ghost writer, I’d say so.  I would not deceive people into thinking that they were getting my writing when they were not.  What makes this even worse is that my writing is free, but Paul charged for his newsletters and defrauded every customer, if he had a ghost writer. Either way, Paul is a liar.

Far too many people are attracted to Paul because he opposes war and favors decriminalization of drugs.  While I tend to agree with him there, whatever positives those policies give him are thoroughly outweighed by the horrors of everything else he represents.  Don’t believe Ron Paul!

Elizabeth Warren surged ahead of Scott Brown (R-MA) in the polls yesterday, and Carl Rove, aka Turd Blossom, unveiled a thoroughly ridiculous attack ad against her.  In his earlier attack, Rove called Warren the intellectual godmother of OWS.  The new ad directly contradicts that, accusing Warren of being the Bankster’s butt buddy, opposing the American people. Say what?

Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren has taken a 7-percentage-point lead over incumbent Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), according to a new poll, buoying prospects for the Harvard professor.

Warren garnered the support of 49 percent of registered voters surveyed, compared to 42 percent for Brown, according to the poll released Wednesday by the Boston Herald and University of Massachusetts-Lowell. Those numbers represent substantial gains for Warren, who trailed Brown 41 percent to 38 percent in a similar poll in October.

While Warren’s 10-point-swing is troubling for the Brown campaign in its own right, perhaps even more troubling is that the senator’s favorability and approval ratings have also dropped substantially. Over the past two months, Brown’s job approval rating has slipped from 53 percent to 45 percent, while only 48 percent say they have a favorable view of their senator. That number is down from 52 percent in September.

Those who have an unfavorable view of Brown have ticked up from 29 percent to 35 percent over the same period…

Inserted from <The Hill>

Keith Olbermann interviewed Ari Berman, exposing the absurdity of Republican attack ads against her.

The notion that Republicans would spend Bankster bucks to attack Warren for supporting Banksters boggles the mind, as Elizabeth pointed out in her interview with Lawrence O’Donnell.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Corporate criminals and their Republican lackeys fear Elizabeth Warren like they fear no other.  We need her voice in the Senate!