Quirky long shots Kucinich and Paul stand tall on Iraq -
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Baltimore Sun.
#1 Aug 1, 2007
After only two sentences I wanted to vomit. I'll never take the Baltimore Sun or your articles seriously again. You are clearly paided to report what your boss tells you to report. How does that feel? Wake up my fellow American, we are not as stupid as you think.
#2 Aug 1, 2007
You, as a lecturer of political science at a university should already know that the likes of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were polling lower than both Congressman Kucinich and Dr. Paul.
Kucinich had the wherewithal to last until the convention in 2004, whereas the other contenders dropped out. He was rewarded with a large enough contingent of delegates to spread his message. It is not unreasonable to assume that given the 70% unapproval ratings for both Bush and Congress, Dennis will be able to repeat his success.
Consider it- the main issue Dennis really speaks about is how he would address poverty, not the war. He has spoken in front of many sympathetic Union audiences of how he would expand the Federal government with a slew of new "Alphabet Soup" agencies designed to lift the nation out of its economic doldrums.
Dr. Paul didn't come into the campaign thinking he could win- indeed, he was drafted by an enthusiastic coalition of Republicans and libertarians. His campaign has been growing and is by all accounts a success, having held onto more of its fundraising money than John McCain. I think you'll find that you're wrong about the impact that Ron Paul is having on the Republican party.
The party had a perfect storm of death over it just a few months ago. Between the numerous scandals that have plagued the Moral Majority/Religious Right (cf, Ted Haggart), the failure of the Iraq War, the scandal-prone Bush administration, and a devastating loss of both houses of Congress to the Democrats, the party was on its way to losing a lot of its members. Instead, Ron Paul's going to bring the party back to life, and in the process, build back a section of the tent that got its last national airing back when Barry Goldwater was running for President.
The GOP as a big-tent party? Just a few years ago, with Karl Rove at the helm, it seemed like the neo-conservative agenda would have hegemony over America for another generation. Ron Paul is going to radically affect the future of the GOP.
Both Dennis and Dr. Paul will be interesting to watch. When the rest of the candidates scurry out of the primaries after Super Tuesday, Dennis will stay alongside the frontrunner, picking up delegates along the way, and his near-socialist vision of a new Democratic Party will once again be aired at the Convention, which will be his success. Dr. Paul has a good chance to clinch the GOP nomination if the current trend continues.
#3 Aug 1, 2007
Yeah I second that previous comment. I read two sentences and started to puke out my tuna sandwich. Ron Paul has the only policies out of all the GOP that make any sense. What people fail to realise is that ...
1. We cannot afford the war on terror crap.
2. Our Millitary is stretched too thin which puts us in more danger.
3. Extremist Islamists are few in number and only threaten us when our foreign polices anger muslims which helps extremists recruit more jihadists.
4. The world hates us and we are more isolated now then ever before in history.
5. Our civil liberties are being destroyed as a result of this war crap.
6. Most people who hear Ron Paul speak support his views.
7, Only a Ron Paul candidacy can repair the damage done by other administrations
8. We will be much safer under a Ron Paul administration
9. Shame on the authors of this article for being so biased and unprofessional.
#5 Aug 1, 2007
Ha, Ha, funny stuff. It's too bad your writing style is a little quirky.
It's interesting that you fail to mention that Ron Paul has more money and way more support at the grass roots than those also rans like Huckabee or Brownback do. My chances of playing WR for the Ravens are much, MUCH better than those latter two ever sitting behind the big desk in the Oval Office.
So, it looks like it's back to the books for you professor.
#6 Aug 1, 2007
Ron Paul is ahead of Huckabee in polls and cash. He's ahead of McCain in cash on hand. We'll see after the next debate, if Julie Annie and Willard (his real name) Romney show up, but it looks like they're too cowardly. Flipflop Fred is still figuring out how to change his position on the war. Once a chicken hawk, always a chicken. CLUCK! CLUCK! CLUCK!
#7 Aug 1, 2007
Oh yes, it is extremely necessary to have these "gadflies" in the campaign and to make them even more visible than they are now. Why? Because the other candidates - except for Mike Gravel - have been bought by the stablished interests and will carry on the war until the last dollar has been wrung out of it. Nobody makes money from a quick war. The longer it lasts, the greater the profit. And the kicker is the new arms deal with our "friends" in the ME - over 20 billion dollars!- that will now go through to make the frightened locals feel macho again, and of course will ring the cash registers of the military industrial complex beneficiaries in the USA.
Business is business, eh? And war has always made somebody rich. This time it’s the inner circle of the supporters of the budding American Empire. No use talking about ethics when you espouse Empire. The Romans and the Brits and all the other Empires that have existed over the past few millenia have never had qualms about exercising the power that they had at the time. Use it or lose it. That is the maxim when power is involved.
Trouble is, you lose it faster the more you use it.
Have these people never read Sun Tzu and The Art of War? Here is a good example (one of many throughout this masterpiece):
In ancient times, those who governed well did not arm, those who were armed well did not set up battle lines, those who set up battle lines well did not fight, those who fought well did not lose, those who lost well did not perish.
In the USA all the opposites have come into play: Bad governing at home, ill-equipped army in the field, horrendous battle lines (where is the enemy?) and bad fighting (can’t ask, won’t tell). The only thing left is to lose well, and it seems even that won't happen.
One more quote: The exercise of kindness in battle leads to victory, the exercise of kindness in defense leads to security.
Ron Paul has the kindness and so does Kucinich. And kindness in the USA is regarded as a weakness instead of a strength. Tough luck for a nation that thinks being tough means being unkind.
... a nation destroyed cannot be restored to existence, and the dead cannot be restored to life.
#8 Aug 1, 2007
I am guessing that no amount of telling Paul supporters that their candidate can't win will deter them from voting their conscience. Who else would they vote for?
Taminy Hall Rudy?
His campaign will implode under the weight of its own mishaps, with cocaine guy, Vitter, 911 FDNY debacle,etc..
He isn't fooling anybody (see senate debates against Ted Kennedy from the 90s)
He is already a non-starter
The red pickup truck driving k-street lobbyist
Establishment intelligentsia (I have read this same article about 20 times before, but Mr. Shaller needed twice as many words to make the same rehashed point. But he did throw in the Baltimore Raven's joke to personalize it a little.) are the last people to predict a shift from the status quo, although they do occur throughout history.
Take to the ballot boxes with conviction, my fellow Paulers!
#9 Aug 1, 2007
"Quirky"? Dennis Kucinich quirky? What is so "quirky" about wanting to end the Bush War in Iraq and save American jobs by getting out of NAFTA and the WTO?
#10 Aug 1, 2007
Tom Schaller, professor of buncombe.
#11 Aug 1, 2007
When Bill Clinton was first a candidate, he had 1% of the vote, and Lieberman was way ahead. To dismiss Ron Paul at this point is a bit premature.
#12 Aug 1, 2007
You are a professor? Then perhaps you should be intellectually honest some time. I would think you would show a bit more respect to a candidate that uses history and the constitution to back up ALL of his positions. I am speaking of Rep. Ron Paul.
Your first sentence alone is misleading, "Libertarian-turned-Repub lican". When he was a Republican congressman WELL BEFORE he ran on the '88 Libertarian ticket.
With such uninformed nonsense; how can any of your future students show you any respect.
#13 Aug 1, 2007
Stop saying Ron Paul has no chance of winning the election! He has a great chance if the media would give him visibility because he wants to bring us back to the true meaning of the Constitution. When people hear him, they back him. Give him a chance to express his philosophy.
#14 Aug 1, 2007
The author is another example of "if you can't do it, teach it".
#15 Aug 1, 2007
There is no competition for Ron Paul and my vote.
As far as the others are concerned, they can play pin the tail on the donkey to decide the winner for all I care, they are all the same anyway.
#16 Aug 1, 2007
I think I'll add Thomas Schaller to the list of those that 'hate Ron Paul'. If you needed to have a license to be a political science teacher sir...yours should be revoked!
www.IHateRonPaul.com - "they hate us for our FREEDOMS!"
#17 Aug 1, 2007
Read about Ron Paul he is the greatest American alive.
Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
#18 Aug 1, 2007
Your article was not bad, although if you want totally honest feedback, I've read this exact article about 25 times, written by other authors. Forgive us Paul-supporters, but it's just getting a bit boring, especially in the face of his clear up-slop in popularity, fundraising, and poll numbers (3% now in most polls and likely going up).
I also have to say I have an immediate reaction of "Oh this guy didn't do a scrap of real research..." when people call him Mr. Paul.
It's Dr. Paul. No big deal, but if you knew anything about him, you'd know he was an OB/GYN who'd delivered over 4,000 babies...
#19 Aug 1, 2007
Your right Professor Schaller! Who cares if a candidate in either party goes against the grain, of Congress. Even though most voters are saying the same things in poll after poll. The American people should have no choices! That's the ESSENCE of the New World Order. No choices. Besides these "quirky" contenders let's take a look at the rest of the field. On the Left we have Mrs. Clinton, never mind that she voted for the war in Iraq and now speaks out against those perpetuating the occupation. Mr. Edwards in a speech to the Council on Foriegn Relations a few months back said his plan for "withdrawal" means pulling out of Iraq, BUT making sure we keep a presence in the region to insure stability. Now I'm not too sure how one leaves AND stays at the same time. This is typical Democrat doubletalk! But the Republicans are almost, mind you I said ALMOST, as bad! We have Mr. Guilliani who is currently representing Cintra, if you don't know what Cintra is do a quick Google search! At the same time Rudy, Romney, McCain, Tommy Thompson and Huckabee think it is completely logical to preemptivly NUKE Iran! That's not "quirky" that's pure INSANITY! Polls show that the Iranian people do not support the current regime and would like more democracy, but who cares let's just NUKE them and not think about the consequences. Mr. Paul and Mr. Kucinich are doing their JOBS! They are representing the views of 70% of Americans, that's the EXACT reason why "the likelihood of either of these two congressmen being nominated is roughly equivalent to" your "chances of starting at left tackle for the Ravens this season." Like I said in the New World Order there are no choices for ordinary people like me to pick from, only the APPERENCE of choice. Look at the rhetoric of the candidates in both parties they are saying the same exact things. "We can't leave Iraq there will be chaos!" James Brown said it better than I will ever be able to, all these candidates, except the two "quirky gadflies", are "Talking Loud! But Ain't Saying Nothing!"
#20 Aug 1, 2007
"A recent national poll shows Mr. Kucinich and Mr. Paul at 3 percent and 2 percent, respectively, among their party's primary voters."
You are either intellectually dishonest or unprepared to write an article. Just Google "Ron Paul" next time and you will disover recent articles like "Fred Thompson Wins, Ron Paul Second in South Carolina Straw Poll." Maybe you just do not want to learn or tell the truth. You make me sick.
#21 Aug 1, 2007
How do you know who will and won't get elected?
Can you see into the future? Playing God are you? You're simply dicrediting these two candidates from the beginning of your article. Nice propaganda!
There's no telling what impact these candidates will have... even if they aren't elected they might help swing the consciousness of Americans to a smaller government.
Add your comments below
|Caldeira comes clean on chemtrails||Mar '15||Dan||1|
|Kucinich introduces resolution to impeach Bush (Jun '08)||Feb '15||swedenforever||403|
|Sanders eyes 'political revolution' in Iowa (Sep '14)||Sep '14||Swedenforever||4|
|Foreclosure Help For Ohioans (Mar '10)||Oct '13||Bonnie Campbell||17|
|Chemical weapons disposal will cost $1 billion,... (Sep '13)||Sep '13||rtloder||73|
|Bill Clinton, Ted Cruz weigh in on defunding Ob... (Sep '13)||Sep '13||conservative crapola||4|
|President Al-Assad's Interview With Fox News (Sep '13)||Sep '13||conservative crapola||3|
Find what you want!
Search Dennis Kucinich Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC