Ron Paul Newsletter
- Thread starter davekc
- Start date
Fair enough .... don't know that I might not have done the same thing myself
Well, it looks as though Jake Witmer, after getting over his holiday dinner, decided to spread a little more holiday cheer, and enlighten us further on Mr. Dingdero's past, and his possible motivations:
My Commentary on the Huffington Post's Hitpiece on Ron Paul
I didn't think that the article I posted was a hit piece like Witner has charecterized. Regarding Dondero's account of events it seemed measured and not like someone was doing a "hatchet job" on Paul.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
It's all a matter of one's perspective .... from your viewpoint, it isn't ....
From mine, it certainly is .....
Of course it did ....
Had it not been, it would have reduced the "credibility" and "believability" of the messenger .... and that's all part and parcel of camouflaging an agenda, by appearing to be "fair and balanced" ....
BTW, Dondero has apparently burned enough bridges and screwed enough people over that he now has his own fan club:
Eric Dondero Fan Club
Last edited:
tbubster
Seasoned Expediter
Air all the so called dirty laundry you want on Dondero,It only raises the question more as to how some one who has such different views and belifes then Paul claims he has,not only worked for paul for such a long time was his personal aid.The more you try and make Dondero look like a nut case the more it is asked how he kept his job for Paul for so long????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
greg334
Veteran Expediter
I think there has to be something said about the 15 minutes concept and the lack of integrity of those who come forward and speak up.
You work for someone, leave that person's employ, then the press comes to you and you have no self-control so you speak up and say things that seem off the wall. This has happened for a lot of people in a lot of areas of our society. The information may be accurate but because people in the general population are too stupid and lack integrity themselves, they believe anything that the person says is true.
One example is the Cain girls who were allegedly harassed by him. They could have said "no comment" but didn't and it seems to me that they want to get their 15 Minutes of fame and expect people to treat them as celebertards.
You work for someone, leave that person's employ, then the press comes to you and you have no self-control so you speak up and say things that seem off the wall. This has happened for a lot of people in a lot of areas of our society. The information may be accurate but because people in the general population are too stupid and lack integrity themselves, they believe anything that the person says is true.
One example is the Cain girls who were allegedly harassed by him. They could have said "no comment" but didn't and it seems to me that they want to get their 15 Minutes of fame and expect people to treat them as celebertards.
Air all the so called dirty laundry you want on Dondero,It only raises the question more as to how some one who has such different views and belifes then Paul claims he has,not only worked for paul for such a long time was his personal aid.The more you try and make Dondero look like a nut case the more it is asked how he kept his job for Paul for so long????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
That is a thought to ponder. Have to add Greg's thought into this as well. That 15 minutes of fame can make some embellish their thoughts.
tbubster
Seasoned Expediter
This is true.However as I said the Paul camp is in attack mode on this guy and it does not help Pauls case that acording to them this guy is totally unbelivable and a liar yet they kept him around for so long.Lets face it they have to try and discredit the guy.However in doing so they are only making themselfs look incompetent for allowing the guy to do the jobs he did for Paul.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
I understand what you're saying but a defense is needed at this point when there is a question about fact. If this is a series of people stepping forward who confirm what he says is true, then there is a need to question the campaign and the person but if it is just one person - no matter how long the guy worked for the candidate - then there is no reason why not to question the validity of the information at the same time his integrity.
Now this doesn't mean that the guy was ramping up towards being booted by Paul, this happens often - a person is loyal until one little thing p*sses them off and they go on the offensive to get "revenge" any way they can. I am betting this is the case, the guy was loyal and faithful but felt he got the shaft so "screw Paul, I'll **** him up".
The reaction to Dondero's article looks like it comes straight out of the Bill Clinton playbook; attack and discredit anyone - especially a former insider - who disparages the candidate. Obviously, it's up to the readers to decide whether Dondero or Witner is the wacko. Considering the level of hysteria coming from the Paul camp in response to Dondero's revelations, one might be led to think they're afraid of what he has to say and the effect it might have on the undecided caucus-goers in Iowa.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Real Polatik ....
Dongdero's own words and actions - over a very long period of time - speak louder than I, or anyone else, ever could.
We're just pointing out Dongdero's record ... personally, I think he's a scumbag, but that's just my opinion ... anyone is free to draw a different conclusion.
Absolutely ...... check into Witmer .... check into Dondero ....
Find out who they are ..... please, please do ...
ROTFLMAO ....
Actually, the Paul campaign has had very little to say about Dondero .... other than: "..... disgruntled, former employee who was fired ....."
Not really .... do you even know why ?
(Steve Deace says Dr. Paul is under-polling in IA - says Paul is actually at around 28%)
BTW, did you check out Doug Wead ... just on Faux shNewz' America Live ?
..... he totally owned Megyn Kelly .....
(Wead is a Newsmax columnist, and Senior Adviser To The Paul Campaign)
Expect more of same in the future ....
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Not really ..... on several counts .... the Paul campaign is actually treating the guy fairly dismissively ... and mostly just ignoring him ...
Second, on the matter of keeping him around, like many people who eventually go off the deep end at some point or another, he appeared to be mostly normal apparently ....
For Dongdero, the event that caused him (and many other Americans) to begin his departure from rationality was 9/11 .... eventually, the thing that caused to totally flip out and lose it was the move to go to war in Iraq .. and Dr. Paul's refusal to support it.
That's the point where he really lost it and went nutso .... he actually went behind Dr. Paul's back and claimed that Dr. Paul supported going to war in Iraq (which Paul didn't)
When Dr. Paul discovered what he was doing and saying, Dr. Paul was .... pizzed off in a very major way ... and Rittberg got shown the door ...
tbubster
Seasoned Expediter
Now here is an article there is a link to it Sorry its in PDF form and will not let me post it.It opens up a full 8 page letter page is is the funnist part of it.Oh yeah it also has what appers to be his Signature.
In ad for newsletter, Ron Paul forecast race war | Reuters
In ad for newsletter, Ron Paul forecast race war | Reuters
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
It is a signature of Ron Paul's name.
But please do explain to one and all, how exactly - other than the fact that it is his name - that it appears that Dr. Paul actually signed it himself personally.
Is it your premise that all signatures of someone's name must be, de facto, done by the person themselves ?
witness23
Veteran Expediter
Well, at least you said, "appears to be his signature". Because if you took the time to compare the signature from the "newsletter" to Mr. Paul's actual signature, you will clearly see that it is not his. It's fairly easy to find Mr. Paul's actual signature by doing a quick "google" search.
Some great reporting by Reuters
Real Polatik ....
Dongdero's own words and actions - over a very long period of time - speak louder than I, or anyone else, ever could.
We're just pointing out Dongdero's record ... personally, I think he's a scumbag, but that's just my opinion ... anyone is free to draw a different conclusion.
Absolutely ...... check into Witmer .... check into Dondero ....
Find out who they are ..... please, please do ...
ROTFLMAO ....
Actually, the Paul campaign has had very little to say about Dondero .... other than: "..... disgruntled, former employee who was fired ....."
Not really .... do you even know why ?
(Steve Deace says Dr. Paul is under-polling in IA - says Paul is actually at around 28%)
BTW, did you check out Doug Wead ... just on Faux shNewz' America Live ?
..... he totally owned Megyn Kelly .....
(Wead is a Newsmax columnist, and Senior Adviser To The Paul Campaign)
Expect more of same in the future ....
The quote from Paul's campaign went on to say "disgruntled ,former employee who was fired....with zero credibility. Did they say zero? As in zilch,nada,zippo? That's just cold to say about someone.
Regarding the Megyn Kelly interview. Cmon now, totally owned Megyn Kelly? Haha. Not exactly a curve ball throwing and fast ball at the head throwing interview? Wead did good,but Kelly didn't even ask about....the newsletters.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Well, that may be true (that it's cold) ... what exactly were you expecting ?
The really big problem for Dongdero, is that it happens to be true.
And in terms of accurate observations, it certainly doesn't approach anything even close to "hysteria" .... (but the claim that it does just might ...
)Watch it again ... he took ever one of her questions - all of which were largely based on particular premises or framing, none of which was even neutral to Dr. Paul .... and flipped them .... Fox carried Wead's message ... unopposed and un-refuted .....
To her credit, I'd consider that Kelly was fair in allowing Wead to respond.
Well, ya coulda had O'Really or Insanity I suppose, doing their typical gig .... where they were just shooting questions ..... and then cutting off the "interviewee" in the middle of their responses, substituting their own lines, and trying to insert their own agendas, by reframing the issues or Dr. Paul's positions with strawmen .....
Personally, I don't call that an honest interview - it smells more like propaganda to me .....
The funniest thing is how willing some are to suck it up ...
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Breaking:
Michelle Bachmann's Iowa State Campaign Co-Chair appeared earlier at a Paul Campaign event ... and endorsed Dr. Paul:
Sorenson: "When the Republican establishment is going to be coming after Ron Paul, I thought it is my duty to come to his aid."
Bachmann Iowa Co-Chair Ditches Her for Paul
I think we may be seeing the beginnings of an ......
.... Uprising ....
Michelle Bachmann's Iowa State Campaign Co-Chair appeared earlier at a Paul Campaign event ... and endorsed Dr. Paul:
Sorenson: "When the Republican establishment is going to be coming after Ron Paul, I thought it is my duty to come to his aid."
Bachmann Iowa Co-Chair Ditches Her for Paul
I think we may be seeing the beginnings of an ......
.... Uprising ....
Last edited:
This guy has zero credibility for doing this right?
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/...ee-hours-after-appearing-at-an-event-for-her/
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/...ee-hours-after-appearing-at-an-event-for-her/
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Is he speaking out derogatorily towards Bachmann personally - and making self-serving uncorroborated charges that he can't substantiate ?
Or has he just re-calibrated based on a political reality that is becoming more apparent as time rolls forward ?
The answer to both of the above is clearly no and yes (in that order) from what I can see. (If you see it differently, then explain how it is so)
Isn't what he did supposed to be what all faithful party members are supposed to do - fall in line and support he front-runner ?
Try to see how things are different, as well as how they are similar.
Making any comparison between what this guy has done (thus far) and Dingdero's rather long history of tawdry conduct isn't even remotely analogous (IMO)
BTW, part of his motivations might have to do with what he's seen on the inside - Bachmann has repeatedly made statements which are highly inaccurate (IAEA report on Iran for starters) and misleading (I'm being polite
)
Last edited: