What is Digg?Sponsored by Amazon.com
Kindle(TM) - Amazon's #1 most gifted product view!
amazon.com - Order Kindle now and receive it in time for Christmas. Free Expedited shipping. Click to learn more.
236 Comments
- WeaponMit, on 10/11/2007, -13/+194My thoughts exactly, Guiliani is either deaf, lying or a complete and total moron.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -13/+184Here's the kicker that makes it all the more cynical. The one thing that was left unsaid, the thing Guiliani and Hannity were really trying to achieve with their provocations was to get Ron Paul to provide a FULLER list of US actions that have caused this Blowback. Which item from that list was notably absent?
Paul is too smart to mention our unequivocal support of Israel as one of the terrorist's main _asserted_ reasons to attack us. Paul didn’t take the bait, thankfully. Because if he had, he knows that Guiliani, Hannity and others would now be calling him an anti-Semite.
That's how it works. Get your opponent on the ropes, punch him to the gut, and when he fights back, call him a dirty fighter. It's the Republican playbook, page 1.
However, if anyone in the MSM wants to now nail Guiliani for lying, the opportunity is right there. He either knows nothing about terrorism (which is his bread and butter, and his claim to the WH) or he was lying. He'll have to choose this time, if anyone puts it to him. - SuperMoses, on 10/11/2007, -8/+81Guiliani needs to go back to simpler things like fighting ferrets. Foreign policy and the dangers of blowback due to covert operations is obviously a concept too difficult for him to grasp. He's still singing the "They hate us because of our freedoms" tune.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -9/+63As far as I'm concerned, Giuliani has disqualified himself for any office that requires knowledge of diplomacy and foriegn policy. I seriously doubt he could pass a political science primer class.
- Birdoftruth, on 10/11/2007, -6/+56@ ilyayg
70% of America oppose the war, so aggressive pro war policies is not going to fly in this presidential race. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+46@EntropyMan: very insightful, it definately appeared they were baiting him, i just didnt notice that thats the most likely thing they were after
Ron paul is a very eloquent and careful speaker
@ilyag, the american people, including american republicans like ron paul because he is the only guy up there not trying to win on #1 of your list
cause thats not what the people want
he is for smaller government though, and less government spending, and LESS #1 on your list
also hes the only one up there who seems to be running on the 'sensability and logic' platform
the others are WAR WAR WAR TORTURE INVADE WAR ..etc..
at least mckain did say he wouldnt torture - DrooliusSneezer, on 10/11/2007, -5/+44"WeaponMit: Guiliani is either deaf, lying or a complete and total moron."
I'm going with
D - All of the above
Ron Paul may trigger my first participation in a Republican primary in 35 years of voting, and should he eventually be the Repub candidate, he will definitely be my first experience in voting Republican for president. - Calann, on 10/11/2007, -5/+43Conservatives refuse to look at the reality of why we were attacked on 9/11. Unless you truly understand the rationale of the terrorist, you will be ineffective in combating them. They delude themselves by saying terrorist hate us because we are free, what nonsense!
Years ago people thought epilepsy was caused by demonic possession. They tried to use exorcism as a cure. Today we better understand epilepsy and treat it with medications and diet. Conservatives are still trying to combat terrorism with exorcisms. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -11/+45Guiliani used the opportunity Ron Paul gave him to show off how aggressive his foreign policy beliefs are, since he's trying to show himself as an anti-terrorism WAR candidate, not so much a diplomatic candidate. Diplomacy doesn't get you elected in GOP circles, hard rhetoric does.
The whole point of these Republican debates is that these guys are trying to top each other on three things:
1) Who has the most aggressive foreign policy beliefs
2) Who has the most socially conservative beliefs
3) Who wants to cut the most taxes and cut down the size of government the most.
These are the three things Republican voters look for, and that's who these candidates are playing to in these debates. This is why Ron Paul is totally dead in the water in these primaries. He should run as a third party candidate, or an independent. He'd get a lot more votes that way. The only reason he doesn't is because he gets a lot of exposure for Libertarian beliefs with these nationally televised debates. Third party candidates don't get invited to these debates. - swifty383, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37That exchange yesterday is typical of why the Republican party is in serious trouble. Telling the truth is shocking and lying is met with applause. I suppose it's human nature to want to blame someone else for our own mistakes.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -8/+38Notice how all mainstream news channels have buried all stories on this debate. What a joke. Just because Ron Paul won they won't cover it.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+33It's not because of Ron Paul as much as it is because the MSM still don't want to come out against the war, even now, even with 70% of the public against it.
They support the fiction that the US is being attacked for our freedoms -- esp. freedom of the press, which makes them the crown jewel in our publicly defiant stance against terrorism. - polyGone, on 10/11/2007, -4/+31He should change his name to Rudy Nine-Eleven.
- intangible, on 10/11/2007, -1/+27@gharding
Because if Ron Paul is just spewing BS like the rest, he's been doing it since the 70's. His voting record has stayed consistent since day one, I doubt he's just saying what people want to hear, he actually believes it and his voting record shows it. - Mikovio, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30Fantastic article.
We can deal with terrorism one of two ways.
Either turn America into a giant prison (by building walls, blaming illegals, authorizing torture, removing habeus corpus, creating a secret police that invades everyone's privacy and kicks down doors at night w/o warrants or so much as a knock) to compensate for how many enemies we're making.
....OR we can look at the reason why most of the world has turned against us and change our foreign policy.
I think we all know the direction Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. have been taking us... and there is nothing "conservative" about this direction at all. - Birdoftruth, on 10/11/2007, -8/+33Yea that article nailed it, I am amazed at how smart Ron Paul is and how great a president he would be if elected. I think he has a very good chance as long as the Federal Reserve does not have any henchmen out to sabotage his candidacy just like they did with William Howard Taft and getting Roosevelt to run just to split the republican votes so Woodrow Wilson could gain presidency and empower the Federal Reserve.
- warcrackhead, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24"Our foreign policy has absolutely nothing to do with how people in other nations hate us!"
What kind of absurd statement is that? What planet are these people living on? - mrlyons, on 10/11/2007, -3/+26While I agree with the Pro Ron Paul sentiment, and definitely believe he won the debate, the ignorant masses were still applauding Guiliani. Why? Americans do not want to admit that mistakes have been made in the past and are just playing the naive card.
The common American doesn't KNOW these things. Our leaders know that, and are playing to that mentality and it's disgusting. It makes me feel like I'm being treated like an idiot.
This online following of Ron Paul, and more importantly the truth, needs to reach the world and American Citizens. - davidburns, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21@dontspamjay
Sure, Rep. Paul doesn't explicitly use the term "blowback" until the reply, but its clear that's what he's articulating when he's talking about "our actions in the Middle East". Mayor Giuliani took the Iraq part specifically and tried to pin that on Rep. Paul, but that didn't really stick. Blowback isn't some mysterious concept, especially to anyone within political circles, or even a man such as Giuliani who prides himself on his experience in dealing with terrorism. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+22@funk: replace "liberals" with "free people" and you're right.
- thecolor11, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20Yes, but why would someone blow themself up? (Hint: It's not because they hate our freedom)
- ExCornelius, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22"Everyday on the ABC, NBC and CBS news programs I see articles speaking out against the war or promoting those with anti-war agends."
Sure, but only *Democrats* are shown as being anti-war. Try finding any MSM article from after the first debates which noted Ron Paul voted *against* the war and *against* the Patriot Act. Heck, he was even asked about it during the first debate, and all you'll see is something akin to "10 Republican candidates stand behind the war."
Let me put it more plainly... with 70% of Americans against the war, if you want to get a democrat in the White House, the last thing you want is an anti-war republican on the ballot. - bplv, on 10/11/2007, -7/+25Very good article
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+21"70% of America oppose the war, so aggressive pro war policies is not going to fly in this presidential race."
It's not a presidential race yet. They're still at the primaries stage of the elections. Right now, all that matters are Republican votes, because that's all you need to win primaries (not counting a small handful of states where other party members can vote). This is why Guiliani jumped on this opportunity to show how tough he is.
Now, whether Republicans themselves want a tough foreign policy guy or a diplomat, I am not sure. It's still not clear if Guiliani's approach will backfire. However, at least here in New York, the front pages of the newspapers are extremely supportive of Guiliani. Today's "Daily News" front page headline: "TAKE THAT BACK!" with a picture of Guiliani pointing a finger (at Paul). Note that the New York Daily News is a liberal-leaning paper.
The only reason I'm saying all this is because there's a political reason for Guiliani to say what he said. It's not that he was lying or acting like a "moron". He was pandering to the Republican base. - CannedMango, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20It looks like McCain can be added to the list of nutjobs who would rather support a false argument than admit the obvious truth, that American intervention in other countries over the decades has created enemies.
Here's his quote:
"I thought Mayor Giuliani's intercession there was appropriate and frankly very, very excellent. I really appreciated it because we should never believe that we brought on this conflict. This is an evil force that is trying to destroy everything we stand for," McCain said.
If you're interested in this topic, read "Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance" by Noam Chomsky. In it he details American exploits over the years. A very well written book with a very objective detailing of the facts. - 1013, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20It was just great watching Guiliani show his true mafia personality. Conservative, Liberal, the Easter Bunny or whatever, any candidate who does not see how our foreign policy has led to terrorism against America, is an idiot.
- akirksey, on 10/11/2007, -6/+22He's betting the American people are idiots, and that they'll believe media hype especially when it comes to 9/11 and his reputation.
Judging by his poll numbers he's right. - roho76, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16Well put. Old school mentality and a narrow mind will get us all killed.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16so are alot of sane conservatives.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17Sounds an awful lot like Clinton's "depends on the definition of is" hair-splitting there Hegemon.
Guiliani was clearly mocking Ron Paul's assertion that terrorism is partly a result of blowback over our actions in the region. Guiliani can phrase it as carefully as he wants, but the fact is, he claimed they want to attack us for our freedoms, which is largely *****. They want justice and revenge, not that I endorse their position at all, but we have to understand it if we have any hope of stopping it. - himey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16I think he means:
http://www.KickThemAllOutExceptRonPaul.com - clownguyx, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16It is amazing to me that none of them object to the war in the same way Ron Paul does. Ron Paul does because he believes he is right. The others should as well, if only for political reasons, simply because getting the nomination will do them no good unless they support ending the war soon.
- spokenorigami, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16Great article. The concept of blowback and Ron Paul's explanation for the causes of terrorism are outlined in the The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. The scary thing is that if Rudy hasn't heard of Paul's logic and reasoning, he didn't read the report. Doesn't that scare anyone else? Here is a guy who was mayor of New York during 9/11 who hasn't read the bipartisan and independent committee commissioned by Bush himself. For a candidate who invokes 9/11 all the time, its pretty suspect that he didn't read the report. It seems to me that he'd be just like Bush; he wouldn't listen any of his advisers who actually know what they're talking about. What a hack.
- ThomasPaine23, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16
Paul told the truth and some people can't handle the truth.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/interviews/scheuer.html
"They hate us for our freedoms and our liberties. There's nothing further from the truth than that. "
"Probably the most damaging of all is our 30-year support for police states across the Islamic world" - b04155, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15I too am someone who lived through Sept 11th, however I disagree with Guiliani. I agree with the statement that our long involvement with the middle east contributed to the attacks. If it were the case that there were zero links between us and them and that we were attacked just out of the blue, then why weren't other places like Playa de Carmen, Heidelberg or Stockholm attacked for example?
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14@ideasware,
I agree to some extent, at least that Paul wasn't as articulate as he could be. I don't think people are delusional in wanting to see the truth be told. However, what he's saying doesn't reduce to sound-bytes as easily as "they hate us for our freedoms." It's the same problem Gore had. The intelligent position always sounds like you're hedging, simply because it's more complicated.
Paul just needs more practice in zippy comebacks. For example, the best thing he could have said when Guiliani asked him for an apology was," Mr. Guiliani, your sole claim for the WH is based on terrorism. If you don't know what blowback is, if you don't read the 9/11 report, CIA reports, or al Qaeda's own statements, how can you claim any credibility in this bid?"
Assuming they let him into the next debates, he'll at least hold his own with facts. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13@thankar, they have no problem showing how horrible the occupation is going. But the most they can bring themselves to endorse (by their choice of pundits and stories, if nothing else) is that BushCo botched the execution. They stand by the claim that "who could have known it would come to this?" when it's clear the MSM were rallying the country for war as much as the administration. And they still haven't come clean over this.
- DigitalOmnivore, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13If he were just spewing bs instead of his beliefs, he wouldn't have a 20 year voting record to back him up. Also, if he just wanted to spew bs, he could just flip flop to popular positions (like Romney). If you wanted to spew bs to win the republican nomination, challenging the party on it's foreign policy obviously wouldn't be the tactic to choose.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14Giuliani is just digging himself deeper and deeper, I haven't met a person who has read about all of this stuff that still likes this guy. He might as well go under the WPP (Witness Protection Program), and get relocated to another country because sooner or later all of his lies will be surfaced and he will be hated by everyone in this country along with all of the others who were involved in the 9/11 scandal.
- yeamodify, on 10/11/2007, -6/+17Guilani and the rest of them are just puppets repeating the same rhetoric, anytime they have to deal with a "new term" they trip over it like Bush does in his speeches, he's full of it and very dangerous
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13The reason this hasn't been digged to all hell is because the majority of people have already made the connection between our foreign policy and the animosity towards the United States. Unfortunately, we aren't the majority vote, FOX and CNN viewers are and we have to convince them that reality is, in fact, directly correlated with our actions. Odd isn't it??
- mrlyons, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12you are right to some extent, but at the same time Paul seems to have a hard time with people who are loud and obnoxious as defense mechanisms. His talk with Sean Hannity afterwards was shameful, because Hannity just got loud and made ridiculous analogies.
Also, thinking on your feet when you know you have a 1 minute time limit in front of an audience of potentially millions is tough. Ron Paul isn't charismatic, and I think he did slip up a bit, but it wasn't intentional. I don't think Ron Paul honestly believes that our policies in Iraq caused 9/11, but rather our entire middle eastern policy did. Iraq, yes Iraq, is part of the middle east, we have a messed up foreign policy there, and it supplements to the entire problem. It's one element in a large complicated equation that has a simple solution, isolation from the entire area and investing lots of R&D dollars into alternative fuel sources. - UnFriendlyFire, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15The Cole attack, the first WTC bombing, 9/11 and the barracks, etc. were retaliation for the U.S.'s support of Israel, our involvement in Kuwait, and having a military base in Saudi Arabia. I am not saying the terrorists are right or justified. I just saying that if you kick a bee-hive and get stung, don't blame the bees.
- ronito, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12This is exactly what I was about to say. Ron Paul has reached the conclusion any intelligent person with a bit of logic would have gotten to.
It is much easier to think that everything's never your fault and people just hate you because you're better or more enlightened. People hear this talking point and cling to it for dear life. When I saw Ron Paul attacked for stating facts and then to hear that appluase I was instantly reminded why I left the republicans so long ago. The easiest answer that affirms belief in your superiority, no matter how blatantly false, is always the right answer. - Godwhacker, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12It is simply insane to believe that our actions don't have reactions. We send our troops to a lot of places, but we rarely bring them home. To expect that others nations should not feel animosity towards that pattern is to be oblivious to reality.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9As President John Quincy Adams, commonly agreed upon as the most intelligent president ever, and is also known as the best foreign relations president in history, once said:
"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. "
It's a shame that we are now in a day and age where intelligent people no longer make it to the white house. - GettinReal, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14Guiliani needs to be tried for treason. The only things positive i can say about this fascist sycophant demogogue ***** sucking political whore ass monkey is that he has alot of guts. He would love to wipe his ass on the Constitution. After all it is just a 18th century document...no relevance in todays post 9-11 world.
He may get on his podium and broadcast his ***** across the planet using the talking picture box and the internets but if he EVER brings that ***** around here....I will tear it down. - Terr01, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14We don't need new people--any such fix is temporary at best.
We need to attack the root of the problem. Public financing for elections, and some voting scheme better than our current gawdawful plurality voting. IRV, Condorcet, whatever. - crazydiode, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12"My thoughts exactly, Guiliani is either deaf, lying or a complete and total moron."
all the above. - polyGone, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9I was just watching Hardball and all they went on about was "Guiliani-McCain-Romney".
I am starting to get really pissed. I wrote MSNBC. -
Show 51 - 100 of 238 discussions
