Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (13282)	12/20/2007 6:49:11 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25737

*Re: [Non-intervention does not* equal "isolationism".] "Yes, of course, I think most everyone understands that much...."** Except for when they clearly don't. :-) (Like the poster I addressed the explanation to....) Re: "...RP's ...doesn't make his position all that clear..." Well, I'm sure he tries. <G> (Like when you were bemoaning the 'fact' that he 'hadn't bothered to speak out against the Saudis' and their ilk --- and we pointed out to the (showing you links to many speeches and statements over several years) that he most certainly HAS done exactly THAT! Probably far more then any other candidate running for the President on either side of the aisle. (Certainly far more then Rudy... with his multi-million dollar 'contracts' with Qatar and other Gulf Sunnis --- there's that 'Saudi ilk' reference again....) No, I think he's been talking all about it, making his views clear and direct for YEARS now... it's just that - for whatever reason - you can't tune to that channel, GZ. For whatever reason you always seem to tune what he is actually saying OUT... (while substituting what you seem to be imagining that he is saying, for his real words). It's like you have some sort of 'filter' operating that distorts and modifies everything you hear on the 'Paul Channel', so that it better comports with some sort of prior conceptions or desires of some sort. :-) Re: "then he needs to clarify his message," No doubt about the fact that he makes for a lousy presence on television. Not from central casting. Not speaking in 10 second sound bites. Not only talking in bromides suitable for, and vetted by, media consultants, SPIN-meisters and market research panels. Re: "...and he can blame no one else but himself for that..." True. Still, after laboring in total obscurity, being ignored and dissed by the media, reviled by the 'inside the Beltway types' from BOTH political Parties, ALL the big deficit spenders and ALL the Authoritarian lovers and enablers of Big Government (I certainly include Bush and Clinton, along with many others, in that category), he has far exceeded all the 'informed opinions' already. Rising fast (admittedly: from 'nowhere') in the recent polls. (Unlike several of the Big Name establishment types who are coming a-cropper now, and nose-diving.) More cash-on-hand to spend then possibly ANY of the other GOP candidates (and more of those contributions from military and military families then ANY OTHER candidate). Broke the One Day campaign contribution record that Kerry set in the last campaign --- establishing a new high water mark in American campaigns. And, he's beginning to help get Libertarian ideas HEARD in the system, being to break-through even on such media back-waters as the local newscasts, local papers. He likely will neither become the candidate, nor win the general election, this election cycle. More's the pity. But, I believe that the ideas he is leading with will BREAK THROUGH into the nation's political gestalt... and have much Long-Term impact in the years to come. (I certainly can't say that about Rudy's 'ideas'... nor Mitt's... nor Clinton's. In fact, a decade out, I'll bet that no one even will be able to remember what these 'media candidates' claimed to be for anyway.)