Site Meter
Share

The Pink Flamingo has been suggesting demanding that Ron Paul be kicked out of the GOP for ages.  So, when The Pink Flamingo sees a headline like this:  Paul Campaign To Newt, Santorum, Perry: “It’s Over” well, it just plain makes me mad.  How dare that arrogant bigot who is running campaign that is based on Democrats, Independents, and Libertarians to tell viable REPUBLICANS to get out of the race.

How dare he!

“…“It’s over,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton in a statement to the press. “Ron Paul, the candidate of real change, will face off against establishment flip-flopper Mitt Romney in the Virginia primary, making that that Tuesday less ‘super’ for serial hypocrite Newt Gingrich, counterfeit conservative Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry, who I should mention is marginally attached to the presidential race.”…“This legal development affirms that this Republican nominating contest has always been a two-man race between the candidates with the resources and organization required for a 50-state race. Voters nationwide should get behind the candidate of real change as he competes nationwide – and nationwide means a lot of states, including large ones like Virginia,” said Mr. Benton.

“Right now South Carolina voters have vital information helpful for deciding not only who the authentic conservative in the race is – Ron Paul – but whether that candidate leaves South Carolina with a ticket that actually gets him somewhere,” added Mr. Benton….”

Finally, one of our top GOP pundits gets it.  Bill Krystol may be the first to demand that Ron Paul be forced out of the party.

“…“[Buchanan] left the party in 1999 and a lot of people, and I was one of them, said, goodbye and good riddance, you’re not in the mainstream of the Republican party, go run as some Reform party candidate . . . he did in 2000 and he didn’t get many votes and actually George W. Bush I think was helped—and the Republican party was helped—to be free of Buchanan’s extreme isolationism, protectionism, anti-Israel views, and the like. Ron Paul is a little different from Pat Buchanan—but he’s no better, in my view. And I actually think we’d benefit in the long run—but even in the short run . . .”

More racist newsletters have been found.  This one really gets me, perhaps more than just about anything I’ve seen spewing from Ron Paul’s vile being.

The New Republic

This really frosts my cookies.  The Pink Flamingo’s heart belongs to the Cincinnati Reds.  Because of Marge Schott, I could not longer, in all decency, support the team I love.  What Schott, an out and out bigot did to my Reds still upsets me.  She was forced to sell the team, but she seriously damaged the image.  And – Ron Paul supported her.

LA Times

This hurts.

I want this man kicked out of the GOP, right this very minute.

“…Paul and his supporters have repeatedly claimed that, even though the newsletters had “Ron Paul” in the title, were sometimes written in the first person, and often carried his signature and photo, the general lack of bylines proves he didn’t author them. Others have claimed that Lew Rockwell, Paul’s former chief of staff, was the author. However, the most infamous of Paul’s publications, the June 1992 issue of his Political Report entitled “A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” (which James Kirchick reported on in his original 2008 investigation for TNR), was later published as a monograph entitled “Race Terrorism in America,” and was bylined by Paul.

In the December 1996 Survival Report, the last issue before he re-entered Congress, Paul wrote that subscribers would receive a free subscription to The Triple R, or Rothbard-Rockwell Report, published by Lew Rockwell and libertarian activist Murray Rothbard. Paul, who has repeatedly claimed over the past month that he “didn’t read” his own newsletters, wrote, “I don’t agree with it 100% either, but I still grab it from the mailbox and read it, front to back, the minute I get it.” This issue also referred to Rockwell in the third person: “The editor, my old friend Lew Rockwell, was my chief of staff in the House, and he’s worked with me for 12 years on this newsletter.” The June 1991 Political Report invited readers to “Join Me” at a conference, mentioning that Rockwell and Rothbard would be speaking alongside Paul….”

The National Review

It is a libertarian problem.  Because the libertarians are doing a very good job infiltrating and destroying the GOP, then it is our problem.

“…What’s important to realize is that this sort of political myopia is endemic to libertarianism. The movement’s obsession with consistency is actually a mark of paranoia. If you’re already persuaded by Paul’s suggestions that fiat money is what ails our economy, that our country’s foreign policy is rotten to its very core, it’s tempting to take the next step and interpret his failure to be nominated as the result of political persecution. Sullivan, thus, complains of a deliberate media blackout against the Texas Congressman, blaming “liberals who cannot take domestic libertarianism seriously and from neocons desperate to keep the Military Industrial Complex humming at Cold War velocity.” There is a bitter irony of course in the fact that a movement so devoted to individual responsibility is so apt to be on the search for others to blame. Paul of course is the prime example: Here is an absolutist libertarian who advocates the ideals of individual rights and responsibility, yet cannot own up to the words that were published under his name, instead blaming it on a variety of as yet unnamed aides….”

Share
  • Tom Leith

    Well, Pinky, Ron Paul is not wrong about everything. Specifically he’s right about 9/11.

  • http://www.thepinkflamingoblog.com SJ Reidhead

    I am so glad we’re back to disagreeing!

    SJR

  • Tom Leith

    Well, I wouldn’t want you to worry for too long and turn that gorgeous red hair grey.

    I am not sure it is right to say that Ron Paul is right except accidentally about anything having to do government. This is because his conception of the origin of Civil Authority is wrong, as well as his conception of its right exercise. When he rails about some abuse or excess and says it oughtn’t be done, that’s right: the abuse or excess oughtn’t be done. He may be right about this or that “issue” considered in isolation, but for the wrong reason. It is an accident.

    Maybe this is why so many people think they agree with Ron Paul — he doesn’t think government should do much of anything. So when YOU don’t think the government ought to do this or that, voila! You agree with Ron Paul! Except you probably don’t.

  • http://www.thepinkflamingoblog.com SJ Reidhead

    Your logic is interesting, LOL! There is a lot that is right about what he is saying, only the messenger is out of either a horror movie or Monty Python. Not sure which!

    SJR

  • Tom Leith

    His philosophy is out of a horror movie or a Monty Python skit, that’s for sure. In a discussion I’ve had with a couple of friends, I liken Ron Paul to a broken clock: it is “right” twice a day but not for a reason intrinsic to the clock. Ditto Ron Paul. There is a real danger here. “I agree with Ron Paul about X, Y, Z, P, D, & Q, all issues important to me. Ron Paul is a Libertarian. I must be a Libertarian. I am also a Christian. I detect no conflict between my Christianity and Ron Paul’s Libertarianism or my own for that matter.” It’s almost like everyone’s channeling Jeff Foxworthy or something: “If you _________, you might be a Libertarian.”

    This is a very easy trap for an American to fall into. We must help them detect the conflict.


WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera