Running a Google news search for Ron Paul this morning I was pretty awestruck at the vast number of MSM articles crying and wailing over Ron Paul’s rise to first place in the Iowa polls. I must admit I get a good dose of humor out of reading these articles.
What this goes to show is that the old guard MSM is becoming ever more irrelevant due to the wonders of the internet. Keep crying MSM, your tears taste so sweet.
A small sampling:
Paul will not win the nomination—but then how to explain his growing popularity? The truth is that, with the singular exception of his Chomskyesque views on foreign policy, Paul is not nearly as divorced from mainstream conservative thought as was the case four years ago.
Paul poses an existential threat to the state’s cherished kick-off status, say these Republicans, because he has little chance to win the GOP nomination and would offer the best evidence yet that the caucuses reward candidates who are unrepresentative of the broader party.
“It would make the caucuses mostly irrelevant if not entirely irrelevant,” said Becky Beach, a longtime Iowa Republican who helped Presidents Bush 41 and Bush 43 here. “It would have a very damaging effect because I don’t think he could be elected president and both Iowa and national Republicans wouldn’t think he represents the will of voters.”
It is possible that Paul will come in first in a fractured field in the Iowa caucuses: Those caucuses reward intensity of support, which he certainly has. The notion that he will be the Republican nominee is too absurd to spend a moment contemplating.
I think he goes way too far on the Federal Reserve. He sometimes sounds like he thinks Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke is sapping our precious bodily fluids. But he’s also been prescient about the Fed’s unchecked power…
Now he insists that everyone in Washington will suddenly do what he wants once he’s in the White House. That’s almost painfully naïve. And it’s ironic that the only way the libertarian-pure-constitutionalist in the race could do the things he’s promising is by using powers not in the Constitution.
The only danger about people like me and Ed saying Ron Paul can never win is that it fuels his anti-establishment cred. Paul has two bases of support: a libertarian base that likes Paul for his consistent purism on stripping government of all but extremely limited powers and a really angry base that is more about creating chaos than philosophy.
“Rep. Paul’s view of the world has nothing in common with the Republican mainstream — from Eisenhower to Nixon to Reagan and both Bushes,” Abrams said in an e-mail. “Watching him it seemed to me his view was reminiscent of that of the Islamic Republic of Iran or Chavez in Venezuela: The world’s real problem is that the United States goes around bombing innocent people.”
Even his inane answers in the most recent debate about how Iran poses no threat to the U.S. or Israel or its neighbors in the Middle East didn’t upset me too much. I just chalked it up to his isolationist extremism
Iowa may be a long way from North Korea, but if Kim Jong Junior has a trigger finger, what Iowa GOP caucus voters do in a couple of weeks should be impacted by what North Korea is doing, has the capability to do, and may do in the future. Republican (allegedly) presidential primary candidate Ron Paul may provide a sense of faux comfort to some with his pooh-poohing the danger of North Korea and insisting we should lift sanctions, making them buy our goods while making nice (leaving South Korea to fend for itself, it would seem), but the reality is far different, and naivete dangerous.
Jules Manson, a former candidate for Carson, Calif. city council and an ardent Ron Paul supporter, has been caught calling for President Obama’s assassination– or, as he puts it: “Assassinate the f***ing n****r and his monkey children.”
[because obviously Ron Paul has control over what his various supporters say, which is why his name appears in the title of the article as if he approved of what was said.]
The fight over Ron Paul isn’t a battle for the soul of the Republican Party so much as for its standards. Throughout his career, Paul hasn’t been able to distinguish between fringy cranks and aboveboard purists. He has taken a principled anti-government position and associated it with loons and bigots.
It may be the ultimate commentary on the weakness of this Republican field that it hasn’t even been able to produce a respectable out-there libertarian.
Paul can be a winsome figure in his irritable, absent-minded-professor way. Invariably wearing a suit jacket that looks a size or two too big, he has stood out in the debates for his knowledge and for his entirely consistent worldview applied to any problem, politics be damned.
Enjoy the laughs.