Something Dirty This Way Comes


There is no way in Hades that Ron Paul is ahead in Iowa.  On Thursday night, in the FOX Debate to Destroy Newt and Crown Mitt, Ron Paul was exposed as the curiously strange, conspiracy believing, isolationist that he is.  There is now talk that he could win New Hampshire.  Sorry, but people aren’t that stupid.  The Clemson poll has him at 10%.

Sorry, but there is no logical way he is now ahead in Iowa.  If he is, then the people of Iowa are abject idiots.  I’m sorry but I’m not seeing it.  Reasonable people do not vote for candidates who are bigoted anti-Hispanic, Anti-Semitic, white supremacist leaning kooks.  You can fool some of the people some of the time, but now all of the people all of the time.

If a quarter of Republicans in Iowa do vote for Ron Paul in the caucuses, we are in very deep trouble in this nation.  It isn’t because Ron Paul is a libertarian, but because he is a narrow minded, white supremacist hugging, anti-Hispanic, Anti-Semitic bigot.

What truly annoys me is the fact that the MSM is just now starting to “discover” the bigotry many of us knew about for years.

I’ve talked to two friends on Monday, both of whom have been visiting with friends in Iowa.  Both say there is no way Ron Paul is polling those numbers.

I’ve seen fluid elections and fluid polls, but this is insanity.  It is rather like FOX giveth and FOX taketh away.  We all know PPP is a Dem poll.  We also know that the NM PPP poll was cooked in favor of the Dems with a very small GOP sampling.  If, as alleged, the poll is weighted a good 6 points in favor of the Dems here, what are they doing elsewhere? So what is wrong here.  The Clemson poll, which is a good poll, has Newt’s momentum growing in SC.  Someone is wrong.  There’s an Iowa poll out that has Newt in good position, unlike the Dem leaning PPP, and Rasmussen, which is in the tank with FOX & Crossroads.

Why would anyone who claims to be a Republican vote for Ron Paul?  Just asking.

Hot Air

“…There can be no confusions about Dr. Paul’s own comments about the U.S. After 9/11, he said to students in Iowa, there was “glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq.” It takes a profoundly envenomed mindset—one also deeply at odds with reality—to believe and to say publicly that the administration of this nation brought so low with grief and loss after the attack had reacted with glee. There are, to be sure, a number of like-minded citizens around (see the 9/11 Truthers, whose opinions Dr. Paul has said he doesn’t share). But we don’t expect to find their views in people running for the nation’s highest office.

The Paul comment here is worth more than a passing look. It sums up much we have already heard from him. It’s the voice of that ideological school whose central doctrine is the proposition that the U.S. is the main cause of misery and terror in the world. The school, for instance, of Barack Obama’s former minister famed for his “God d— America” sermons: the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, for whom, as for Dr. Paul, the 9/11 terror assault was only a case of victims seeking justice, of “America’s chickens coming home to roost.”

Some in Iowa are reportedly now taking a look at Dr. Paul, now risen high in the polls there. He has plenty of money for advertising and is using it, and some may throw their support to him, if only as protest votes. He appears to be gaining some supporters in New Hampshire as well. It seemed improbable that the best-known of American propagandists for our enemies could be near the top of the pack in the Iowa contest, but there it is. An interesting status for a candidate of Dr. Paul’s persuasion to have achieved, and he’ll achieve even more if Iowans choose to give him a victory…”

If this latest poll is to be believed, then PPP and Rasmussen are up to something, which I have a tendency to believe.

Iowa Caucus

Ron Paul is not to happy to be on the hot seat when it comes to his bigoted past.

The Hill

“…Moreover, Kirchick goes on to point out that Ed Crane, “the president of the Cato Institute, said Paul told him that ‘his best source of congressional campaign donations was the mailing list for the Spotlight, the conspiracy-mongering, anti-Semitic tabloid run by the Holocaust denier Willis Carto.’”  To this reader, that sentence is the most important one in Kirchick’s article.  It reveals, for the first time, that a great deal of Paul’s funding for his successful congressional campaigns comes from one of the most notorious anti-Semitic papers in America.

Finally, Kirchick reveals that Paul is a regular guest on the single most extremist far-right radio program hosted by a man named Alex Jones. I first heard of Jones while on a speaking engagement in California, where a man who drove me around insisted I hear tapes of Jones that he had amassed. Jones is so crazed in his support of conspiracy theories about everything that he makes Lyndon LaRouche and Michael Savage appear apostles of sanity. Kirchick quotes Paul as telling Jones in a March 2009 broadcast that “we need to take out the CIA.” Just last week, Paul told Jones that the report of an attempted Iranian assassination in the U.S. of the Saudi ambassador was nothing but a “propaganda stunt.”…”

How to Destroy a Man’s Reputation in One Easy Lesson

In 1961 a rather unsuccessful author named Frank Waters saw his fondest desires published. Since around 1933 or so, he had been trying, in vein, to destroy the reputation of one Wyatt S. Earp. With the publication of The Earp Brothers of Tombstone, he succeeded beyond his wildest imagination. Using undocumented sources, misrepresentations, half-truths, manipulation of facts, and out-lies, he managed to blacken a man’s good name.

With the publication of A Book of the Hopi, and five (count ’em) unsuccessful nominations for a Nobel Prize in literature, his once tawdry reputation was rehabilitated. No one bothered to listen to Hopi elders who condemned the book. Frank Waters had become a legend in his own time. Cruel, narcissistic, and vindictive, he would stop at nothing to get his way, including bullying a young wife who adored him.

Frank Waters became such a legend, no one dared cross him. No one dared challenge the “truth” about his treatment of the Earps and Doc Holiday. It did not matter. He had the “truth” on his side. No one bothered to check to see if his facts were accurate. No one bothered checking his sources. No one even thought to look up the sourcing on the book. Frank Waters was telling the “truth”.

There were rumors that Waters had a previous manuscript, Tombstone Travesty. Earp “historian” John Gilchriest was rumored to have the manuscript. He did not. It was alleged to be in the bowels of the archives of the Arizona Historical Society. It was not. No one knew where it was.

In 1995, Frank Waters died. His papers were all donated to the University of New Mexico. A certain writer now known as The Pink Flamingo took a chance and decided to call special collections. Not long after the manuscript was listed in the catalogue, I drove to Albuquerque from Ruidoso, where I was now living. Being a New Mexico resident (by all of 3 weeks) helped. A few weeks later I had the whole manuscript in my dirty little hands.

The first thing I discovered was that the final version was different from the manuscript. The next thing I discovered was due to certain copyright anomalies, I could annotate the manuscript. It took several years, 528 pages and about 2000 footnotes, but I did it.

Why is this story important – today?

The far right is out of control. There’s nothing wrong with endorsing and supporting a candidate, but when you reach a point where, like Ann Coulter or Jennifer Rubin, you are willing to do exactly what Frank Waters did, then you have reached a point where you are no longer a viable “journalist” but a hack. Both of them have begun to do nothing but vomit words of bile spewed at Newt Gingrich.