I would agree there is a fanaticism and zealotry among ardent Ron Paul supporters which many find unsettling. Paul's following have all the intensity and harshness of a Sam Kinison scream. Ron Paul's admirers would fare better by toning down the anger a notch or two. This candidate and his supporters are about to come under intense scrutiny from the national media. The media will seek to shred and distort Paul until he is unrecognizable. Just like all the front-runners who came before him.
The Real Newt Gingrich
- Thread starter RLENT
- Start date
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
ROTFLMAO .... one just has to love when an individual just can't help themselves .....
In fact, I often wonder when observing this phenomena, whether those who do this are even aware that they're doing it ....
Do they not understand how it might recoil and affect their own credibility ?
In some, it's so rampant (almost like a totally uncontrollable compulsion) that it could provide full-time employment for a small handful of people pointing out and debunking the fallacies .... personally, I already have a full-time career .....
Let me see if I can make it very plain, by providing the relevant materials for educational enhancement:
"An association fallacy is an inductive informal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. The two types are sometimes referred to as guilt by association and honor by association. Association fallacies are a special case of red herring, and can be based on an appeal to emotion"
Association Fallacy
Hasty Generalization Logical Fallacy
Red Herring
Appeal to Emotion Fallacy
Posting articles which tend to be filled with logical fallacies themselves, does not exactly speak well of the ability to see the consequences of one's own actions and to reason (due to the effect that doing so, has on their own credibility), nor does it speak particularly well of their motivations.
It doesn't take too very long before it comes fairly obvious to one and all what the motivation actually is - no matter how coy the language of presentation is ..... One can obfuscate all they want - at some point it becomes painfully clear that: the Emperor truly has no clothes ....
It's always quite impressive when someone states a premise ..... and then just assumes that .... by virtue of being in long-term employment of the Wesayso Corporation®, they are thereby magically relieved of the burden of providing any evidence to support their proposition.
Of course, a real, true irony would be if anyone who is prone to using this type of illogical thinking and these types of irrational arguments would make it a regular practice to use derisive terms such as "wacky", "lunatic fringe" .... and other similar terms which are descriptive of a less than complete mental capacity ....
I would suggest that when one is apparently utterly incapable of making an argument without resorting to illogic and irrational reasoning (either by themselves or by others, which they present) .... that it might just be the case that a little discretion would be the better part of valor when using such descriptive labels ....... lest they end up looking totally foolish as a consequence of resembling an adjective that they themselves have already employed .....
Further, I would suggest if someone, who has a documented historical record of expressing rather disgusting, uncivilized sentiments .... that might be considered tantamount to bigoted religious hatred ..... as well as publicly endorsing acts which would violate both the Geneva Conventions and the very principles of the individual human rights which are enumerated in the Declaration of Independence (which are not entirely dissimilar to the charges they are forwarding) ...... were to try to "slime" a candidate - simply by pointing to an article about an individual (who claims to be a supporter, and which the candidate has possibly never even met) ..... it probably ain't the very brightest idea in the universe ..... particularly when said article is, itself, just chockful of logical fallacies itself .....
Given that glass houses often tend to be fairly transparent ..... it may not be entirely obvious to the individual chuckin' the boulders, that they, themselves, are actually already inside ..... just by virtue of the fact of their own past public pronouncements .....
A final few words of wisdom: In terms of the practice of public relations, well executed, there is an old guiding principle, which goes something this (my paraphrase)
"Use extreme care when slinging the slime, because in doing so, one kinda has a tendency of getting covered with it yourself ..."
These little diversions are always great fun .... and provide an opportunity for a little mental exercise ..... although, if there is a downside, it's got to be that they really don't pose much in the way of a challenge intellectually-speaking .....
.... yawn ... btw, thanks for stoppin' by and playin' .... better luck next time ....
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
.... Newt ! Newt ! he's our guy ....
Man for All Seasons
by Bill Bonner
Daily Reckoning
The Daily Reckoning has no voice in the US presidential elections. But we will nevertheless declare a preference. Were he to toss his hat in the ring, we would line up behind former Senator Jon Corzine. The ex-Goldman chief has the experience that America needs. He has been a front-runner in politics…and in the world of finance, what he doesn’t know about front running is probably not worth knowing. Presuming, however, that Corzine will be too busy fending off lawsuits or jail sentences, our next choice is Republican Newt Gingrich. Of course, we find him completely repulsive, who wouldn’t? But we believe he’s the man of the hour. History needs him, to carry on the work of Bush and Obama, hustling the great nation on its way to Hell.
It is rare for a decent man to seek public office. He is ashamed of pandering. He is embarrassed by the stupidity of his own slogans. He is appalled by the low-lifes and quasi criminals with whom he must associate and from whom he must beg support.
They are all swarming around Newt Gingrich now. The handlers, pollsters, word polishers, idea chiselers, fund raisers, donors, hangers on, groupies, roadies – carpet-bagging rascals every one of them. Now they’ve got the scent in their nostrils. Their chests heave. The hearts pump. If they can just keep their man Newt from blowing himself up they’ll be in high cotton for at least 4 years. One will head a commission or a cushy seat at the UN. Another will get a contract to provide the pentagon with new ID badges. Another will ride into a remote Congressional seat on Newt’s coattails. Power. Money. If Newt wins, they win. Newt’s women will think themselves smarter and prettier. The men among them will feel their most private part growing bigger.
American presidential candidates generally fall into three categories. Those who are obviously incompetent. Those who are scalawags. And those who are *******es. The job of the voters is to choose the defect most suited to the time.
Winston Churchill was a disaster as First Lord of the Admiralty during WWI; the Gallipoli campaign was his doing. Then, on how to deal with the Iraqi insurgents, circa 1920, he offered this advice: Use chemical weapons “against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment,” he suggested, adding, “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes to spread a lively terror.” Later, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he put Britain back on the gold standard, but at a level that was bound to cause trouble. It came, in 1929.
He may have been incompetent. He may have been a big-mouth imperialist. But Churchill was the man Britain needed in 1940.
When times are good, the public generally prefers a scalawag. Clinton was the perfect president for the ’90s boom years. Warren Harding would have been a great fit with the boom of the ’20s. He drank. He played cards. He snuck out of the White House to go to girlie shows. Otherwise, he left people alone. But he was a little early. Most of the “Roaring Twenties” boom happened during the Coolidge administration. On the surface, Coolidge was a mismatch. Straitlaced. A bit of a scold. But he minded his own business and – like Clinton during the dotcom bubble or Bush during the property bubble – he let speculators ruin themselves without raising an objection.
The trouble with Herbert Hoover was that he was too much of a nuts and bolts engineer. The public turned him out. They preferred Roosevelt’s confident malarkey. They wanted a man with a plan. No matter that the plan was claptrap. They’d never figure that out.
That’s the problem with Obama. He has no plan. He doesn’t know what is going on, or what to do about it. Which at least marks him as more intelligent than most of his challengers, who have the wrong idea on both counts. But neither brains nor competence is what the public wants now. In an emergency it wants Churchill, not Chamberlain. A Roosevelt, not a Hoover. It wants a bold liar. A hearty delusional.
Gingrich is their man. A letter in The Financial Times compared him to Churchill. He compares himself to de Gaulle. Both are correct, in our view. He is as humble as de Gaulle and at least as competent as Churchill. He is a cad who reportedly told his second wife that she was too old and too ugly to be a president’s wife. He is a scoundrel who took $1.8 million from zombie mortgage lender, Freddie Mac. He makes angels weep; the gods get their backs up. So cometh Newt Gingrich to the Republican race. If you’re dumb enough, you think he’s smart. If you’re corrupt enough, you think he is honest. If you compare him to the field of candidates, he doesn’t seem any more asinine than the rest.
He is incompetent, scalawag and ******* all in one package. A man for all seasons. Most importantly, he is committed to keeping America on course to its own destruction. The US already runs the biggest deficits in the developed world. Gingrich would add to them – by about $850 billion, according to one estimate. He hopes Reagan-era growth will eventually balance the books. He also thinks an Electro-Magnetic Pulse is one of the biggest dangers America faces. And he believes in American exceptionalism – as if the nation can dodge fate with some special math that applies to it alone. But if you begin asking questions about Newt’s pensee you are missing the point. America’s empire is decadent and degenerate. It needs a man like Newt to help it on its way… to where all exceptional empires end up – on the scrap heap of history.
by Bill Bonner
Daily Reckoning
The Daily Reckoning has no voice in the US presidential elections. But we will nevertheless declare a preference. Were he to toss his hat in the ring, we would line up behind former Senator Jon Corzine. The ex-Goldman chief has the experience that America needs. He has been a front-runner in politics…and in the world of finance, what he doesn’t know about front running is probably not worth knowing. Presuming, however, that Corzine will be too busy fending off lawsuits or jail sentences, our next choice is Republican Newt Gingrich. Of course, we find him completely repulsive, who wouldn’t? But we believe he’s the man of the hour. History needs him, to carry on the work of Bush and Obama, hustling the great nation on its way to Hell.
It is rare for a decent man to seek public office. He is ashamed of pandering. He is embarrassed by the stupidity of his own slogans. He is appalled by the low-lifes and quasi criminals with whom he must associate and from whom he must beg support.
They are all swarming around Newt Gingrich now. The handlers, pollsters, word polishers, idea chiselers, fund raisers, donors, hangers on, groupies, roadies – carpet-bagging rascals every one of them. Now they’ve got the scent in their nostrils. Their chests heave. The hearts pump. If they can just keep their man Newt from blowing himself up they’ll be in high cotton for at least 4 years. One will head a commission or a cushy seat at the UN. Another will get a contract to provide the pentagon with new ID badges. Another will ride into a remote Congressional seat on Newt’s coattails. Power. Money. If Newt wins, they win. Newt’s women will think themselves smarter and prettier. The men among them will feel their most private part growing bigger.
American presidential candidates generally fall into three categories. Those who are obviously incompetent. Those who are scalawags. And those who are *******es. The job of the voters is to choose the defect most suited to the time.
Winston Churchill was a disaster as First Lord of the Admiralty during WWI; the Gallipoli campaign was his doing. Then, on how to deal with the Iraqi insurgents, circa 1920, he offered this advice: Use chemical weapons “against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment,” he suggested, adding, “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes to spread a lively terror.” Later, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he put Britain back on the gold standard, but at a level that was bound to cause trouble. It came, in 1929.
He may have been incompetent. He may have been a big-mouth imperialist. But Churchill was the man Britain needed in 1940.
When times are good, the public generally prefers a scalawag. Clinton was the perfect president for the ’90s boom years. Warren Harding would have been a great fit with the boom of the ’20s. He drank. He played cards. He snuck out of the White House to go to girlie shows. Otherwise, he left people alone. But he was a little early. Most of the “Roaring Twenties” boom happened during the Coolidge administration. On the surface, Coolidge was a mismatch. Straitlaced. A bit of a scold. But he minded his own business and – like Clinton during the dotcom bubble or Bush during the property bubble – he let speculators ruin themselves without raising an objection.
The trouble with Herbert Hoover was that he was too much of a nuts and bolts engineer. The public turned him out. They preferred Roosevelt’s confident malarkey. They wanted a man with a plan. No matter that the plan was claptrap. They’d never figure that out.
That’s the problem with Obama. He has no plan. He doesn’t know what is going on, or what to do about it. Which at least marks him as more intelligent than most of his challengers, who have the wrong idea on both counts. But neither brains nor competence is what the public wants now. In an emergency it wants Churchill, not Chamberlain. A Roosevelt, not a Hoover. It wants a bold liar. A hearty delusional.
Gingrich is their man. A letter in The Financial Times compared him to Churchill. He compares himself to de Gaulle. Both are correct, in our view. He is as humble as de Gaulle and at least as competent as Churchill. He is a cad who reportedly told his second wife that she was too old and too ugly to be a president’s wife. He is a scoundrel who took $1.8 million from zombie mortgage lender, Freddie Mac. He makes angels weep; the gods get their backs up. So cometh Newt Gingrich to the Republican race. If you’re dumb enough, you think he’s smart. If you’re corrupt enough, you think he is honest. If you compare him to the field of candidates, he doesn’t seem any more asinine than the rest.
He is incompetent, scalawag and ******* all in one package. A man for all seasons. Most importantly, he is committed to keeping America on course to its own destruction. The US already runs the biggest deficits in the developed world. Gingrich would add to them – by about $850 billion, according to one estimate. He hopes Reagan-era growth will eventually balance the books. He also thinks an Electro-Magnetic Pulse is one of the biggest dangers America faces. And he believes in American exceptionalism – as if the nation can dodge fate with some special math that applies to it alone. But if you begin asking questions about Newt’s pensee you are missing the point. America’s empire is decadent and degenerate. It needs a man like Newt to help it on its way… to where all exceptional empires end up – on the scrap heap of history.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Who are these many ?
The politically apathetic, who, while recognizing the corruptness of the very system they suffer under, and constantly bemoaning and wailing, yet do nothing ? Them ?
Or how about those, who have surrendered their own idealism to the debased putrefaction of a corrupt body politic, solely in the interests of political expediency ?
Is it they whose unsettlement I should be concerned with ?
Perhaps it is those who seem to be not really ever for anyone (or maybe anything), but only against .... are these ones ?
Sam Kinison screams kinda reminds of the (neo)"conservative" media in relation to one certain man .....
Red Meat ! More Red Meat for the masses !
Here is what you should think about these matters, consider no others !
Or perhaps those that subscribe to a faux American Exceptionalism .... one based on a demonstrably false account of history and willful ignorance of facts ...
Maybe the Islamophobic, religious bigotry and hatred crowd - you know:
.... the Pro-Lifers for Death™ ....
This is an observation I cannot fault you for - for you are correct - certainly true in my own case, I'm sure.
Nevertheless, there are times when anger is the correct and appropriate emotion, are there not ?
And this is somehow new news ?
The good Doctor, and many of his supporters, have been down this road before .... we know already what awaits ....
Oh I think that there might well be a few lay persons that attempt to get in on that game as well .... but it's really hard to get such things stick when you're clean .... and there is a distinct downside to those that try it ..... (but we'll leave that for another day, for those to whom it remains unobvious still)
Back when there were three TV channels and no internet, it worked ... but today is an entirely different game - people are waking up ..... information, like people, wants to be free .... it's truly "a match made in heaven" ....
It's certainly true that some choose not to avail themselves of those resources ........ one can only look on them some degree of pity, sitting there, imprisoned behind bars of their own making ........ the condemned and convicted, as they serve their sentences in isolation .......
Last edited:
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Ah, now we got it!
Person: Who did you vote for?
Pilgrim: Ron Paul.
Person: Oh... you like Art Bell then?
Person: Who did you vote for?
Pilgrim: Ron Paul.
Person: Oh... you like Art Bell then?
witness23
Veteran Expediter
You're kidding right?
Guilt by association?
Weak at best.
I know of one particular website and forum that would do itself a huge favor and not tolerate hate-filled, paranoid, delusional rants also.
We agree on that, for sure
tbubster
Seasoned Expediter
You know it is the people who try and twist words of others that truly are part of the problem in this country.
Wow - Paul is a lying scumbag with borderline sociopathic tendencies, and his supporters [whose comments will be forbidden] are bottom feeding scum?Thank you for bringing it to our attention. Faced with such overwhelmingly persuasive and incisive proof, I have to wonder how someone with the level of mental acuity so clearly displayed in his writing ever learned to turn on his computer, much less go online.Now where does anybody in this thread call paul a scumbag?You twist peoples words and turn them into something else to fit your agenda does not change the fact you are the first person to refer to paul as a scumbag.
Faced with such overwhelmingly persuasive and incisive proofThats funny right there thanks for the laughs.When some women started saying cain harresed them Cain denied this yet this was not good enough for some on here.Then he "changed his answer and that was all that was needed,to say this alone was enough for some of you to say it shows he is not fit to be president.If he can not handle simple questions how well he handle the tough ones?Deny it all you want the racist news letters are Pauls to own.When he was first asked about them in 96 he called them "HIS WORDS"Then He changed his story to well one that does not add up.
Ron Paul the Constitutionalist.Its funny what people say when they think no one is paying attention .Take his feelings on scotter libby.When asked during a debate if he would pardon Libby,Paul said no.Not because of the crime Libby was convitced of but because of The lies That paul claims Libby told that led this country to war.Now what Paul paul is really saying is he would have sent him to prison for lying about something that had nothing to do with the crime libby was charged with.Yep that sounds like a man who belives in the constitution.Again its funny what is said when they think no one is paying attention.
Its funny how Paul supporters point out all that is wrong with anyones thinking when a person says they back someone else.Yet they themself refuse to see the things Ron paul has done wrong and why some of these things will stop him from ever being president.You see when Myself or some one else endorses Cain,Newt,OR Romney we are slammed for all the things we dont understand,the things we dont know,We are told we are sheep that are led by the fools.There are links posted that lead to thigs that happend 20 years ago that in some peoples words show proof of why we are wrong and we just dont get it.Now dont you think that its only fair for us to do the same when it comes to paul.By the way you are all going to get part of what you have wanted for a while now.Paul is about to recive the Black carpet treament that the rest of those running from the media have been reciving.
For those that say they are indapendent or republican that say they are for paul yet claim if he he does not get the nod then might as well vote for Obama,I say you are not a real paul man/woman.I mean really do you think that Paul will vote for the man who stands more for the very things he is against then any of the other republicans if he is not on the ticket????Well then again!!
Wow - Paul is a lying scumbag with borderline sociopathic tendencies, and his supporters [whose comments will be forbidden] are bottom feeding scum?Thank you for bringing it to our attention. Faced with such overwhelmingly persuasive and incisive proof, I have to wonder how someone with the level of mental acuity so clearly displayed in his writing ever learned to turn on his computer, much less go online.Now where does anybody in this thread call paul a scumbag?You twist peoples words and turn them into something else to fit your agenda does not change the fact you are the first person to refer to paul as a scumbag.
Faced with such overwhelmingly persuasive and incisive proofThats funny right there thanks for the laughs.When some women started saying cain harresed them Cain denied this yet this was not good enough for some on here.Then he "changed his answer and that was all that was needed,to say this alone was enough for some of you to say it shows he is not fit to be president.If he can not handle simple questions how well he handle the tough ones?Deny it all you want the racist news letters are Pauls to own.When he was first asked about them in 96 he called them "HIS WORDS"Then He changed his story to well one that does not add up.
Ron Paul the Constitutionalist.Its funny what people say when they think no one is paying attention .Take his feelings on scotter libby.When asked during a debate if he would pardon Libby,Paul said no.Not because of the crime Libby was convitced of but because of The lies That paul claims Libby told that led this country to war.Now what Paul paul is really saying is he would have sent him to prison for lying about something that had nothing to do with the crime libby was charged with.Yep that sounds like a man who belives in the constitution.Again its funny what is said when they think no one is paying attention.
Its funny how Paul supporters point out all that is wrong with anyones thinking when a person says they back someone else.Yet they themself refuse to see the things Ron paul has done wrong and why some of these things will stop him from ever being president.You see when Myself or some one else endorses Cain,Newt,OR Romney we are slammed for all the things we dont understand,the things we dont know,We are told we are sheep that are led by the fools.There are links posted that lead to thigs that happend 20 years ago that in some peoples words show proof of why we are wrong and we just dont get it.Now dont you think that its only fair for us to do the same when it comes to paul.By the way you are all going to get part of what you have wanted for a while now.Paul is about to recive the Black carpet treament that the rest of those running from the media have been reciving.
For those that say they are indapendent or republican that say they are for paul yet claim if he he does not get the nod then might as well vote for Obama,I say you are not a real paul man/woman.I mean really do you think that Paul will vote for the man who stands more for the very things he is against then any of the other republicans if he is not on the ticket????Well then again!!
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
There's not a nickel's worth of difference between Obama and the rest of the GOP field, .06, tops.
--
You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
tbubster
Seasoned Expediter
Nothing could be further from the truth.Sadly some will not see this untill its to late.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
.... although you may well disagree with him on where the hate-filled, paranoid, delusional rants are actually coming from ....We agree on that, for sure
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Actually it would more accurate to say that:
"Nothing could be closer to the truth, and the failure of so many to be able to see how that could be so, may mean that it is, in fact, already too late ...."
As always: YMMV
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Well, you can say whatever you'd like - but since you are clearly not a supporter of Dr. Paul, your view on the matter is likely to be, at least, slightly skewed, and so, not objective.
What Dr. Paul ultimately decides to do with his vote is entirely his business, and none of mine. And likewise, the reverse.
Additionally, on the basis of "what is good for the goose, is also good for the gander":
....... it may simply be a case of having to vote for the lesser of two evils ......