Thursday, February 16, 2012

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism


<sigh>
The author of the piece, of course, was attempting to answer why 'Terrorists' have sprouted in the late 20th century as enemies.

That Obama might have expanded upon the Bush program of Israeli support et al is not actually relevant. You can continue to try OR at least drift further and further from the initial words, concepts and ideas, but it will not actually make it relevant to the piece.

Regard$,
--MJ

"Republicans hate Obama, but it's said one most hates those like oneself." -- Sheldon Richman




At 01:30 PM 2/16/2012, you wrote:
According to the worthy post starter and terrorist cite, its because
we support Israel.

Romney and Santorum would ramp that up, and that would be bad.


The fact Obama has ramped it up more than anyone yet, it just
irrelevant, and shalt not be spoken

On Feb 16, 10:00 am, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 8:07 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:> Mitt Romney's Superficial View of TerrorismPosted byMichael S. Rozeffon February 15, 2012 07:37 PM
> > There is no doubt that the terrorists we are talking about here (which are only a portion of all terrorists on earth) are violent, radical Islamic fundamentalists. But does that explain much? It does not explain why they have sprouted in the late 20th century as enemies. Why not earlier? They have had centuries to blossom. Why now? Their old enemies were in Europe.
>
> Why have they now chosen America as an enemy?
>
> That's actually a simple question to answer; they see liberalization,
> progress and modernization as a threat to their way of conservative
> beliefs.
> And they are correct, it is.
> But to that, I say, too bad.
> Going backwards is not an option, and never will be.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism

we know who he is and who he represents

it's way past time to remove zionists from our government

On Feb 16, 10:07 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Rahm's dad killed Palestinians for a living.  His bio was removed from
> Wikipedia the day after Bambi was elected.  Its still gone.
>
> On Feb 16, 10:06 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> > right?
> > ---http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUFa6d4R6OU
>
> > Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.
> > ---
> > or Jacob Lew
>
> > or:
> > Jack Lew        Chief of Staff to the President
> > David Plouffe   Senior Advisor to the President
> > Danielle Borrin         Associate Director, Office of Public Engagement;
> > Special Assistant to the Vice Preisdent
> > Gary Gensler    Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
> > Dan Shapiro     Ambassador to Israel
> > Gene Sperling   Director National Economic Council
> > Mary Schapiro   Chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission
> > Steven Simon    Head of Middle East/North Africa Desk at the National
> > Security Council
> > Eric Lynn       Middle East Policy Advisor
>
> > Past Staff Members
> > Rahm Emanuel (2009-2010)        Chief of Staff to the President
> > David Axelrod (2009-2011)       Senior Advisor to the President
> > Elena Kagan (2009-2010)         Solicitor General of the United States
> > Peter Orszag (2009-2010)        Director of the Office of Management and
> > Budget
> > Lawrence Summers ('09-'11)      Director National Economic Council
> > Mona Sutphen (2009-2011)        Deputy White House Chief of Staff
> > James B. Steinberg ('09-'11 )   Deputy Secretary of State
> > Dennis Ross (2009-2011 )        Special Assistant to the President, Senior
> > Director for the Central Region to the Secretary of State
> > Ronald Klain (2009-2011)        Chief of Staff to the Vice President
> > Jared Bernstein (2009-2011)     Chief Economist and Economic Policy
> > Advisor to the Vice President
> > Susan Sher (2009-2011)  Chief of Staff to the First Lady
> > Lee Feinstein (2009)    Campaign Foreign Policy Advisor
> > Mara Rudman (2009)      Foreign Policy Advisor
>
> > On Feb 16, 8:25 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> > > right?  Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Of all the real super genius people out there...

> On Feb 16, 11:04 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Nurse:  Professor, do you believe in God.
>
> > Einstein:  My dear, I have spent my whole life trying to watch him
> > work

 "Let the people who deplore scientism demonstrate another methodology
that delivers the goods the
 way that science does." - Carl Sagan

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Head of World Bank?








 

 

Hillary Clinton Seeks Head of World Bank Job?

February 15, 2012

Reuters is reporting three sources have confirmed that Hillary Clinton has been in talks with the White House to leave the Department of State to take the job as head of the World Bank, replacing Robert Zoellick. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says the reports are "totally wrong," and a Clinton spokesperson denies that she is interested in the job or has had contact with the White House.

World Bank President Robert Zoellick informed the 187-nation lending organization's board Wednesday that he will leave office June 30, the end of his five-year term.

This raises a question: who will replace him?

"I'm honored to have led such a world class institution with so many talented and exceptional people," Zoellick said in a statement announcing his plans.

The board now begins a selection process to find a new leader, a process that is expected to be more open than in the past. Under an informal agreement dating to the bank's founding nearly 68 years ago, its president has been an American.

"Speculation has been rife in recent months over who might take the job when Zoellick departs,"  Reuters reports. "Possible U.S. candidates include Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former White House economic adviser Larry Summers."

"Hillary Clinton wants the job," a source told Reuters.

If Clinton were to leave State, Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is at the top of the list of those who would replace her.

And although Press Secretary Jay Carney denies that Clinton will get the nod from President Obama, the rumors persist.

It has also been rumored that Zoellick, a President George W. Bush appointee, may be a potential candidate for a senior position if a Republican candidate takes the White House in November.

Zoellick said he will stay focused on being bank president until June 30 and will continue to drive policies and programs at a heightened tempo. For example, later this month the bank said he will unveil a groundbreaking study on the future structure of China's economic growth model, the Associated Press reports.

Under Zoellick's leadership, the bank provided more than $247 billion to help developing countries boost growth and overcome poverty.

Zoellick said he was "pleased that when the world needed the bank to step up, our shareholders responded with expanded resources and support for key reforms that made us quicker, more effective and more open."

He said the bank was now in a strong position and ready for new challenges "so it is a natural time for me to move on and support new leadership."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/world-bank-head-exits-hillary-could-replace/


 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Communist Party USA Endorses Obama & Democrats for 2012

On Feb 16, 1:51 am, BB47 <mde...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> I think it would be great if YOU cited your policies!  Way more
> entertaining

I don't write for your entertainment.
But perhaps you could write for ours?

> That is why we need to hear how you fix everything. Here is your
> chance instead of complaining. I'll do it if you will.

I never said I had a fix to everything, only you would be so arrogant
to suggest you did.
So please feel free to write your opinions about them.... or are you
scared to?

"For all must agree with all, and they cannot know if their thoughts
are the thoughts of all, and so they fear to speak" --Ayn Rand, from
"Anthem"

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Conservative... another definition

Of which, since neo-conservatism has come into existence, the only
thing most people can say how they define conservatism is that they
belong to that political party... the rest has become meaningless.
---
the neo part has not become meaningless

On Feb 16, 10:22 am, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Conservative used to mean to conserve;
> conservative:
> adjective;
> 1. conforming to the standards and conventions of the middleclass
> 2. resistant to change
> 3. unimaginatively conventional
> 4. avoiding excess
> noun;
> 1. a person who is reluctant to accept changes
> 2. a member of the conservative party
>
> Of which, since neo-conservatism has come into existence, the only
> thing most people can say how they define conservatism is that they
> belong to that political party... the rest has become meaningless.
>
> They are not beholden to the middleclass in any way shape or form...
> instead they defend the rich, and the rich alone.
>
> Unimaginative?
> For the most part, not changing policies, but rather the names of
> those policies.
>
> Avoiding excess?
> Only if you're poor or middleclass, otherwise you enjoy 12 houses like
> Sen. McCain does.
>
> When Theodore Roosevelt was President, he set aside public lands to
> "conserve" for future generations to enjoy.
> Neo-cons instead want to drill and strip mine those very lands.
> Yes, a change in policy... for the worse!
>
> If you hold the belief that conservatives are indeed resistant to
> change...
> that could be why so many conservatives are still infantile.
> And are really no different than our Islamic terrorist enemies who
> strive to hold on to Islamic laws formulated 800 years ago.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Of all the real super genius people out there...

On Feb 16, 11:04 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Nurse:  Professor, do you believe in God.
>
> Einstein:  My dear, I have spent my whole life trying to watch him
> work

Precisely my point, he HAD to dumb it down for those who DO believe.
What do you think, he wants to get into an argument about God with
someone who may not even have a fundimental understanding of his work?

Don't be ridiculous Greg.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: So you thought the universe was infinitely big... how about a multiverse that makes our universe look like the size of an atom?

I'm not fearmongering ... I'm pointing out the relationship that is
developing between the US and China.

fearmongering is for republicans and democrats

On Feb 15, 9:09 pm, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 10:45 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > they
> > can put one through a bathroom window in Chicago
>
> Not if we shoot it down first... and we can.
> They can't do that.
>
> Anymore fear-mongering you have for us today plainol?

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Conservative... another definition

Conservative used to mean to conserve;
conservative:
adjective;
1. conforming to the standards and conventions of the middleclass
2. resistant to change
3. unimaginatively conventional
4. avoiding excess
noun;
1. a person who is reluctant to accept changes
2. a member of the conservative party

Of which, since neo-conservatism has come into existence, the only
thing most people can say how they define conservatism is that they
belong to that political party... the rest has become meaningless.

They are not beholden to the middleclass in any way shape or form...
instead they defend the rich, and the rich alone.

Unimaginative?
For the most part, not changing policies, but rather the names of
those policies.

Avoiding excess?
Only if you're poor or middleclass, otherwise you enjoy 12 houses like
Sen. McCain does.

When Theodore Roosevelt was President, he set aside public lands to
"conserve" for future generations to enjoy.
Neo-cons instead want to drill and strip mine those very lands.
Yes, a change in policy... for the worse!

If you hold the belief that conservatives are indeed resistant to
change...
that could be why so many conservatives are still infantile.
And are really no different than our Islamic terrorist enemies who
strive to hold on to Islamic laws formulated 800 years ago.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: What Anonymous is and What Anonymous is not

"Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever
reminding us to place principles before personalities." - Alcoholics
Anonymous, Tradition 12

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: So you thought the universe was infinitely big... how about a multiverse that makes our universe look like the size of an atom?

Actually, that was me.

I got this feeling you don't know about the Loral/Clinton/Bernie
Schwartz/China thing.

On Feb 15, 10:09 pm, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 10:45 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > they
> > can put one through a bathroom window in Chicago
>
> Not if we shoot it down first... and we can.
> They can't do that.
>
> Anymore fear-mongering you have for us today plainol?

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism

Rahm's dad killed Palestinians for a living. His bio was removed from
Wikipedia the day after Bambi was elected. Its still gone.

On Feb 16, 10:06 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> right?
> ---http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUFa6d4R6OU
>
> Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.
> ---
> or Jacob Lew
>
> or:
> Jack Lew        Chief of Staff to the President
> David Plouffe   Senior Advisor to the President
> Danielle Borrin         Associate Director, Office of Public Engagement;
> Special Assistant to the Vice Preisdent
> Gary Gensler    Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
> Dan Shapiro     Ambassador to Israel
> Gene Sperling   Director National Economic Council
> Mary Schapiro   Chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission
> Steven Simon    Head of Middle East/North Africa Desk at the National
> Security Council
> Eric Lynn       Middle East Policy Advisor
>
> Past Staff Members
> Rahm Emanuel (2009-2010)        Chief of Staff to the President
> David Axelrod (2009-2011)       Senior Advisor to the President
> Elena Kagan (2009-2010)         Solicitor General of the United States
> Peter Orszag (2009-2010)        Director of the Office of Management and
> Budget
> Lawrence Summers ('09-'11)      Director National Economic Council
> Mona Sutphen (2009-2011)        Deputy White House Chief of Staff
> James B. Steinberg ('09-'11 )   Deputy Secretary of State
> Dennis Ross (2009-2011 )        Special Assistant to the President, Senior
> Director for the Central Region to the Secretary of State
> Ronald Klain (2009-2011)        Chief of Staff to the Vice President
> Jared Bernstein (2009-2011)     Chief Economist and Economic Policy
> Advisor to the Vice President
> Susan Sher (2009-2011)  Chief of Staff to the First Lady
> Lee Feinstein (2009)    Campaign Foreign Policy Advisor
> Mara Rudman (2009)      Foreign Policy Advisor
>
> On Feb 16, 8:25 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> > right?  Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Of all the real super genius people out there...

Nurse: Professor, do you believe in God.

Einstein: My dear, I have spent my whole life trying to watch him
work

On Feb 16, 10:16 am, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 9:40 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > He also advised FDR not to do it, and was extremely, and devoutly
> > religious.
>
> lol... uh, no Einstein was NOT devoutly religious... while he did
> sometimes use God as a reference for certain things, if anything he
> was agnostic.
>
> "Only Buddhism is compatible with science. It covers the smallest
> particles to the largest creations of the cosmos.  It is the only
> religion capable of scientific truth." - Albert Einstein
>
> Does this sound like a guy who is supporting Judaism or religion?
> Buddhists don't believe in a God Greg.
>
> And another great American scientist Carl Sagan as eulogized by his
> wife Ann Druyan ...
>
> When my husband died, because he was so famous
> and known for not being a believer, many people
> would come up to me--it still sometimes happens--
> and ask me if Carl changed at the end and converted
> to a belief in an afterlife. They also frequently ask
> me if I think I will see him again. Carl faced his death
> with unflagging courage and never sought refuge in
> illusions. The tragedy was that we knew we would
> never see each other again. I don't ever expect to be
> reunited with Carl.
>
> But, the great thing is that when we were together,
> for nearly twenty years, we lived with a vivid
> appreciation of how brief and precious life is. We
> never trivialized the meaning of death by pretending
> it was anything other than a final parting. Every
> single moment that we were alive and we were
> together was miraculous--not miraculous in the
> sense of inexplicable or supernatural. We knew we
> were beneficiaries of chance. . . . That pure chance
> could be so generous and so kind. . . . That we
> could find each other, as Carl wrote so beautifully in
> _Cosmos_, you know, in the vastness of space and
> the immensity of time. . . . That we could be together
> for twenty years. That is something which sustains
> me and it's much more meaningful. . . . The way he
> treated me and the way I treated him, the way we
> took care of each other and our family, while he
> lived. That is so much more important than the idea
> I will see him someday.
>
> I don't think I'll ever see Carl again. But I saw him.
> We saw each other. We found each other in the
> cosmos, and that was wonderful.
>
> Copyright (c)2003 Ann Druyan
>
> Sorry Greg, he never believed in illusions either.
>
> > It was a dem congress that killed the Superconducting Super Collider
> > in 1993
>
> Probably because they already have one! And instead invested in the
> much larger one in Europe.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Communist Party USA Endorses Obama & Democrats for 2012

On Feb 16, 1:51 am, BB47 <mde...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> I think it would be great if YOU cited your policies!  Way more
> entertaining

I don't write for your entertainment... but feel free to write for
mine all you want.

> That is why we need to hear how you fix everything. Here is your
> chance instead of complaining. I'll do it if you will.

I never said I had fixes for everything, only you would be so arrogant
as to suggest you did.

So go ahead and write... you never know, I might agree with some, or
none.
Or decide that socialists make more sense than you.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Of all the real super genius people out there...

On Feb 16, 10:16 am, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 9:40 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It was a dem congress that killed the Superconducting Super Collider
> > in 1993
>
> Probably because they already have one! And instead invested in the
> much larger one in Europe.

Strange how you're now upset with a Dem congress for saving money!

Because to build our own would have cost FAR more money than being one
of many sponsors of an International endeavor... of which was already
in existence!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Of all the real super genius people out there...

On Feb 16, 9:40 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> He also advised FDR not to do it, and was extremely, and devoutly
> religious.

lol... uh, no Einstein was NOT devoutly religious... while he did
sometimes use God as a reference for certain things, if anything he
was agnostic.

"Only Buddhism is compatible with science. It covers the smallest
particles to the largest creations of the cosmos. It is the only
religion capable of scientific truth." - Albert Einstein

Does this sound like a guy who is supporting Judaism or religion?
Buddhists don't believe in a God Greg.

And another great American scientist Carl Sagan as eulogized by his
wife Ann Druyan ...

When my husband died, because he was so famous
and known for not being a believer, many people
would come up to me--it still sometimes happens--
and ask me if Carl changed at the end and converted
to a belief in an afterlife. They also frequently ask
me if I think I will see him again. Carl faced his death
with unflagging courage and never sought refuge in
illusions. The tragedy was that we knew we would
never see each other again. I don't ever expect to be
reunited with Carl.

But, the great thing is that when we were together,
for nearly twenty years, we lived with a vivid
appreciation of how brief and precious life is. We
never trivialized the meaning of death by pretending
it was anything other than a final parting. Every
single moment that we were alive and we were
together was miraculous--not miraculous in the
sense of inexplicable or supernatural. We knew we
were beneficiaries of chance. . . . That pure chance
could be so generous and so kind. . . . That we
could find each other, as Carl wrote so beautifully in
_Cosmos_, you know, in the vastness of space and
the immensity of time. . . . That we could be together
for twenty years. That is something which sustains
me and it's much more meaningful. . . . The way he
treated me and the way I treated him, the way we
took care of each other and our family, while he
lived. That is so much more important than the idea
I will see him someday.

I don't think I'll ever see Carl again. But I saw him.
We saw each other. We found each other in the
cosmos, and that was wonderful.

Copyright (c)2003 Ann Druyan

Sorry Greg, he never believed in illusions either.

> It was a dem congress that killed the Superconducting Super Collider
> in 1993

Probably because they already have one! And instead invested in the
much larger one in Europe.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism

You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
right?
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUFa6d4R6OU

Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.
---
or Jacob Lew

or:
Jack Lew Chief of Staff to the President
David Plouffe Senior Advisor to the President
Danielle Borrin Associate Director, Office of Public Engagement;
Special Assistant to the Vice Preisdent
Gary Gensler Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Dan Shapiro Ambassador to Israel
Gene Sperling Director National Economic Council
Mary Schapiro Chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission
Steven Simon Head of Middle East/North Africa Desk at the National
Security Council
Eric Lynn Middle East Policy Advisor

Past Staff Members
Rahm Emanuel (2009-2010) Chief of Staff to the President
David Axelrod (2009-2011) Senior Advisor to the President
Elena Kagan (2009-2010) Solicitor General of the United States
Peter Orszag (2009-2010) Director of the Office of Management and
Budget
Lawrence Summers ('09-'11) Director National Economic Council
Mona Sutphen (2009-2011) Deputy White House Chief of Staff
James B. Steinberg ('09-'11 ) Deputy Secretary of State
Dennis Ross (2009-2011 ) Special Assistant to the President, Senior
Director for the Central Region to the Secretary of State
Ronald Klain (2009-2011) Chief of Staff to the Vice President
Jared Bernstein (2009-2011) Chief Economist and Economic Policy
Advisor to the Vice President
Susan Sher (2009-2011) Chief of Staff to the First Lady
Lee Feinstein (2009) Campaign Foreign Policy Advisor
Mara Rudman (2009) Foreign Policy Advisor

On Feb 16, 8:25 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> right?  Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

The Obama Bundler Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Loans Poster




New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog

The Obama Bundler Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Loans Poster

by Scotty Starnes

Obama has paid back his campaign bundlers with billions in taxpayer-backed guaranteed loans. Steve Westly and Stephen Spinner are just two of the bundlers who have been rewarded. This chart shows the Obama-Obama Bundler connection and the amount of taxpayer cash each received.

H/T to Doug Ross

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/the-obama-bundler-taxpayer-backed-green-energy-loans-poster/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Terror-linked CAIR spitting blood over Rutherford, TN sheriff’s hiring of anti-Islam former FBI agent to train deputees



New post on Bare Naked Islam

Terror-linked CAIR spitting blood over Rutherford, TN sheriff's hiring of anti-Islam former FBI agent to train deputees

by barenakedislam

A former FBI agent who claims Nashville's mosques have no legal right to exist is training the Rutherford County Sheriff's Office about Islam and the threats of terrorism.

Tennessean  John Guandolo, vice president of the Arlington, Va.-based Strategic Engagement Group, is leading training being held at World Outreach Church in Murfreesboro. He spoke at an anti-Shariah law event at Cornerstone Church in Madison on Nov. 11, calling local mosques front organizations for the Muslim Brotherhood with no right to exist.

"They do not have a First Amendment right to do anything," Guandolo said then.

Rutherford Sheriff Robert Arnold said his department simply wants to learn about Muslim culture."There are not many classes out there for anything when it comes to Muslims … but this training isn't just about that, it has many other components to it," he said. "My stance is and my office's stance is, we are not here to pick sides. I am here to protect the people of this county, and I am never going to waiver from that." Arnold has said the department has no plans to initiate an investigation of any local Muslims.

Guandolo's role in training law enforcement officials left Murfreesboro Muslims dumbfounded.

Saleh Sbenaty, a member of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, said the sheriff's office never asked local Muslims to participate in the training. He said the department is supposed to protect the rights of citizens no matter what their faith.

Using a trainer who thinks Muslims have no civil rights doesn't make sense, he said.

"This training is hate training," Sbenaty said. "It is not training to keep our whole community safe."

A national Muslim civil rights pressure group Terror-linked CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) raised questions about the training for deputies. In a letter, the Council on American-Islamic Relations asked Tennessee Law Enforcement Training Director Brian Grisham to investigate the appropriateness of training being led by Strategic Engagement Group.

barenakedislam | February 16, 2012 at 2:27 am | Categories: CAIR Nazis | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-FDf

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://barenakedislam.com/2012/02/16/terror-linked-cair-spitting-blood-over-rutherford-tn-sheriffs-hiring-of-anti-islam-former-fbi-agent-to-train-deputees/




--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

The List OF 75 US Senators Who Voted To Let 30,000 Drones Shoot Americans In The Streets




New post on ACGR's "News with Attitude"

The List OF 75 US Senators Who Voted To Let 30,000 Drones Shoot Americans In The Streets

by Harold

Video Rebel's Blog 2/12/2012 The House and Senate voted for the passage of the FAA bill that funds 30,000 drones to surveil Americans knowing that the majority are to be armed initially with shotgun tasers. Two Americans a week die from tasers so these are lethal weapons. But these drones can easily be equipped with [...]

Read more of this post

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://a4cgr.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/04-878/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism

On Feb 16, 8:07 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Mitt Romney's Superficial View of TerrorismPosted byMichael S. Rozeffon February 15, 2012 07:37 PM
> There is no doubt that the terrorists we are talking about here (which are only a portion of all terrorists on earth) are violent, radical Islamic fundamentalists. But does that explain much? It does not explain why they have sprouted in the late 20th century as enemies. Why not earlier? They have had centuries to blossom. Why now? Their old enemies were in Europe.
Why have they now chosen America as an enemy?

That's actually a simple question to answer; they see liberalization,
progress and modernization as a threat to their way of conservative
beliefs.
And they are correct, it is.
But to that, I say, too bad.
Going backwards is not an option, and never will be.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Ron Paul’s Last Hurrah

After being rejected by a GOP mutated beyond recognition, he and his
brigades of fervent followers will not be content until they've
stormed the gates of the federal Leviathan and made a good-faith
attempt at bringing the monster down. It will be Paul's last
hurrahand
---
the dems and repubs will not forsake those in the fed reserve or on
wall street ... they know who they represent

On Feb 16, 8:29 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Ron Paul's Last HurrahbyJustin Raimondo• February 13, 2012 •
> At this point it is clear that Rep. Ron Paul is not going to be the presidential nominee of the Republican Party.  Yet it seems likely that he will outlast all his rivals but for Romney, and that he will have a substantial bloc of delegates at the convention.  Paul has the money, and the grassroots support, to make it all the way to Tampaand beyond.
> It's when we get to the "beyond," however, that things get interesting.
> What, exactly, is Paul's endgame?  What does he want?  This is the question the pundits are asking, and the answer is maddeningly elusive.
> On the one hand, Republican primary voters are increasingly open to his message of real free markets (as opposed to the crony capitalism championed by most Republicans), the defense of civil liberties (against largely Republican antagonists), and a noninterventionist foreign policy (an idea opposed by the leadership of both parties).  He is regularly getting around 20 percent of the vote in GOP primaries, and his supporters are mostly (albeit not exclusively) young, independents inclined to vote Republican, and not that well off (under $50,000 per year).
> His support grew by the day, in spite of a media blackoutand when simply refusing to report on his campaign didn't put a dent in his support, the mainstream media turned to smear tactics.  That hasn't worked, either.
> On the other hand, Paul's support within the GOP has a definite ceiling: I'd be surprised if his poll numbers exceeded 25 percent in any state's primary.  This is a commentary not on Paul, but on the evolution of the Republicans, whose brand has been sullied by eight years of George W. Bush's big-government conservatism.  Since many Republican presidential primaries are closed, Paul's political fortunes are left in the hands of those who are registered members of a party committed to eternal war, corporate subsidies, and the cult of the presidency.  The political independents and disaffected Democrats who make up half his base are prevented from voting for him in closed GOP primaries, which is why we see polls showing him in a dead heat with Barack Obama in the general election juxtaposed against other polls showing him in the upper teens in the GOP primary pack.
> GOP leaders are living in fear of a Paul third-party candidacy in the general election: Polls show Paul would garner 18 percent of the vote as an independent, and as the election draws nearer and scrutiny of Romney gets more intense, I fully expect that number to rise.
> Provocatively, Paul hasn't ruled out a third-party run, but he says he isn't planning on it, and doesn't want to do it.  Of course he doesn't want to do it: Who would?  After all, even getting on the ballot is a Herculean task; and besides, he's having too much fun right now running in the major leagues to be sent down prematurely to play third-party "gadfly," which he did in 1988 with negligible success.  So he's likely to keep them guessing until the very last moment.
> If the GOP bigwigs are hoping Paul will eventually endorse the nominee, and bring his supporters into the Romney camp, they don't know anything about the Texas congressman, who has spent his whole political career fighting the very forces represented by Romney and his backers.  Take it from me: It isn't going to happen.  And even if it didif Ron Paul were suddenly possessed by an evil spirithe wouldn't bring very many of his supporters with him.  His followers are just like him: principled, cantankerous, and uninterested in merging with the "mainstream."
> The GOP hierarchy thinks it has Paul over a barrel.  By holding his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), hostage, the wags inform us that Paul is unlikely to launch a third-party campaign, because it would supposedly end Rand's career.
> Maybe, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.  This isn't just a political campaignit's a cause.  The many followers who have been recruited to his banner are expecting something more than a fizzle-out in Tampa.  They have put their hearts and soulsand, more significantly (for libertarians), their cashinto this effort, and they aren't going to be happy with some anticlimactic end to the Ron Paul story.  They want closure.  They want to know they at least did everything they could to avoid the apocalypse Paul has spent the last 30 years or so warning us about: an economic downturn that will make the crash of '08 look like child's play, and the end of liberty in America.
> In my view, a third-party campaign by Paul is the logical outcome of his entire career: After being rejected by a GOP mutated beyond recognition, he and his brigades of fervent followers will not be content until they've stormed the gates of the federal Leviathan and made a good-faith attempt at bringing the monster down.  It will be Paul's last hurrahand, perhaps, the last hurrah of our Old Republic.This article first appeared in the March 2012 issue ofChronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here to subscribe, so you won't miss one of Justin Raimondo's exclusive columns!http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/02/13/ron-pauls-last-hurrah/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Left-Right Paradigm is a Hoax

On Feb 16, 9:00 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
"Left-Right Paradigm is a Hoax. Both, Liberals and Conservatives are
Selling Out America
> By Chuck Baldwin
> February 16, 2012
> NewsWithViews.com

> There may have been a time when the words "conservative" and "liberal" meant something, but that time is no more. Today, "conservatives" in government are doing as much to promote Big Government, as are "liberals." In fact, if one were to honestly evaluate the twelve years of the George Herbert Walker Bush and G.W. Bush administrations, one could say that "conservatives" even eclipse "liberals" in promoting Big Government. Under the two Bushes, the federal government expanded (and even exploded) to levels that for-real liberal Democrats could only dream about.

> Let's get realistic. Just because a politico says he or she is "pro-life," or "pro-family," or "pro-marriage," etc., does not mean that they are going to do anything to help save the country. Come on, folks; think! "

> Both "conservatives" and "liberals" look to the federal government to establish and enforce their parochial agendas. "Liberals" look to Washington for the establishment of "social justice," while "conservatives" look to Washington for the establishment of "military justice." The net result is the federal government keeps getting bigger and bigger regardless of who controls the White House, Congress, or Supreme Court.

> Ladies and gentlemen, face it: the left-right paradigm is a hoax! It creates false conflicts and masks true problems.

Not only does it mask the real problems, it creates and/or promotes
new ones that here-to-fore did not even exist for the purpose of
amplifying the control the 2 party dualoploy exert over us.

If the 2 party system was a corporation, they'd be broken-up for
monopolistic tendencies.

Within a short time of introduction; you can choose from 1000
different types of cell phones, ice cream, donuts, automobiles, boats,
airplanes, houses, books, computers, clothes, stores, doctors,
lawyers, dentists, stocks, cruises, ... in short, everything... of
which the real owners of the country (the rich) own already and want
to sell you.

So why we still stuck with a dominate 2 party dualopoly after 200
years?

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism


ROTFLMAO!
Curious you never recognize your projections.

Yes, Obama is pursuing/expanding the GWB policies providing us with Bush's third term (McCain would have given us the SAME). The Seven Three Dwarfs seeking the Republican nomination will ALL provide us with Obama's second term.
What *any* of this has to do with Rozeff's words, concepts and ideas is not known, but certainly trying to skew the discussion to irrelevance is useful in maintaining your pleasing vision.

Regard$,
--MJ

"Government is in reality established by the few; and these few assume the consent of all the rest, without any such consent being actually given."  Lysander Spooner






At 09:42 AM 2/16/2012, you wrote:
Dodgeball

On Feb 16, 9:26 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Did you know that it is raining at my house today?
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> The extortions and oppressions of government will go on so long as such bare fraudulence deceives and disarms the victims. . . . They will come to an end when the victims begin to differentiate clearly between government as a necessary device for maintaining order in the world and government as a device for maintaining the authority and prosperity of predatory rascals and swindlers.  H. L. Mencken, Prejudices, p. 188.At 09:25 AM 2/16/2012, you wrote:You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> right?  Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney's Superficial View of Terrorism

Dodgeball

On Feb 16, 9:26 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Did you know that it is raining at my house today?
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> The extortions and oppressions of government will go on so long as such bare fraudulence deceives and disarms the victims. . . . They will come to an end when the victims begin to differentiate clearly between government as a necessary device for maintaining order in the world and government as a device for maintaining the authority and prosperity of predatory rascals and swindlers.  H. L. Mencken, Prejudices, p. 188.At 09:25 AM 2/16/2012, you wrote:You do realize Obama has ramped up support for Israel big time,
> right?  Perhaps Rahm Emanuel was a clue.
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Of all the real super genius people out there...

He also advised FDR not to do it, and was extremely, and devoutly
religious.

It was a dem congress that killed the Superconducting Super Collider
in 1993

On Feb 14, 11:26 pm, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 1:22 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > people doing research into the most complicated
> > problems of our time.
> > Researching medicines, researching the universe, researching quantum
> > physics...
> > ----
> > are as clueless to the big picture as the religious
>
> rotflol... yeah, I'll start getting all my science info from you from
> now on!
>
> Lets see you invent an atom bomb!
> Clueless?... it was Einstein who told the pols of the day that an atom
> bomb was indeed possible... not the other way around moron.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: How To Get Fired From FOX In Under 5 Minutes

well, we do have something in common

On Feb 15, 9:29 pm, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 4:06 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey Studio!
>
> > As with you,  I am glad to see you posting here once again!  I disagree
> > with most all of the rhetorical dogma that you post, but most of the time,
> > you make me have to stop and think!
>
> > It's good to see ya!
>
> Thank you for the kind words Keith.
> I'm glad I'm making you think even if it's just a little bit.
>
> That's one of the reasons I liked that clip of Napolitano, because he
> asked the question multiple times... "what if".
> Although I personally believe that some of those questions are not
> what if, but "they are".
>
> I know that there are those here that believe I am a supporter of
> Obama...
> but nothing could be further from the truth.
> I could post some angry letters I have written to him... even going so
> far as to tell him; "I am your enemy" and "that I would never vote for
> him".
> But that in no way implies that I am a friend to Republitards at all,
> as you can so easily tell.
>
> I believe they are politicians first, and party loyalists second...
> with the country being a distant 3rd on their priority list.
> This by itself negates them from any possibility of being the
> recipient of my vote.
>
> I post here not to change minds and switch parties, but so that people
> may hear totally different opinions and options... instead of that
> narrow 2 sided (2 dimensional) box  the Judge spoke of.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: How To Get Fired From FOX In Under 5 Minutes

And just what are his opinions on the matter?
---
NAPOLITANO: It's hard for me to believe that it came down by itself. I
was gratified to see Geraldo Rivera investigating it. I am gratified
to see that people across the board are interested.
I think twenty years from now, people will look at 9-11 the way we
look at the assassination of JFK today. It couldn't possibly have been
done the way the government told us.

On Feb 15, 9:38 pm, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 4:26 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I like that guy a lot, and respect his opinions
> > ---
> > Napolitano believes that the 9/11 incidents including the subsequent
> > collapse of the World Trade Tower buildings in New York City did not
> > take place as the US government has publicly communicated.
>
> And just what are his opinions on the matter?
>
> > Napolitano is a pro-life libertarian, more commonly known as
> > libertarian conservatism
>
> Change that around to Conservative libertarian with a big C and small
> l...
> Real Libertarians in no way believe in government restricting or
> eliminating womens rights to choose to have an abortion.
>
> > Napolitano has called consumer advocate and frequent presidential
> > candidate Ralph Nader a hero of his.
>
> Ralph Nader... why he's a socialist plainol!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Ron Paul’s Last Hurrah


Ron Paul's Last Hurrah
by Justin Raimondo • February 13, 2012 •

At this point it is clear that Rep. Ron Paul is not going to be the presidential nominee of the Republican Party.  Yet it seems likely that he will outlast all his rivals but for Romney, and that he will have a substantial bloc of delegates at the convention.  Paul has the money, and the grassroots support, to make it all the way to Tampa­and beyond.

It's when we get to the "beyond," however, that things get interesting.

What, exactly, is Paul's endgame?  What does he want?  This is the question the pundits are asking, and the answer is maddeningly elusive.

On the one hand, Republican primary voters are increasingly open to his message of real free markets (as opposed to the crony capitalism championed by most Republicans), the defense of civil liberties (against largely Republican antagonists), and a noninterventionist foreign policy (an idea opposed by the leadership of both parties).  He is regularly getting around 20 percent of the vote in GOP primaries, and his supporters are mostly (albeit not exclusively) young, independents inclined to vote Republican, and not that well off (under $50,000 per year).

His support grew by the day, in spite of a media blackout­and when simply refusing to report on his campaign didn't put a dent in his support, the mainstream media turned to smear tactics.  That hasn't worked, either.

On the other hand, Paul's support within the GOP has a definite ceiling: I'd be surprised if his poll numbers exceeded 25 percent in any state's primary.  This is a commentary not on Paul, but on the evolution of the Republicans, whose brand has been sullied by eight years of George W. Bush's big-government conservatism.  Since many Republican presidential primaries are closed, Paul's political fortunes are left in the hands of those who are registered members of a party committed to eternal war, corporate subsidies, and the cult of the presidency.  The political independents and disaffected Democrats who make up half his base are prevented from voting for him in closed GOP primaries, which is why we see polls showing him in a dead heat with Barack Obama in the general election juxtaposed against other polls showing him in the upper teens in the GOP primary pack.

GOP leaders are living in fear of a Paul third-party candidacy in the general election: Polls show Paul would garner 18 percent of the vote as an independent, and as the election draws nearer and scrutiny of Romney gets more intense, I fully expect that number to rise.

Provocatively, Paul hasn't ruled out a third-party run, but he says he isn't planning on it, and doesn't want to do it.  Of course he doesn't want to do it: Who would?  After all, even getting on the ballot is a Herculean task; and besides, he's having too much fun right now running in the major leagues to be sent down prematurely to play third-party "gadfly," which he did in 1988 with negligible success.  So he's likely to keep them guessing until the very last moment.

If the GOP bigwigs are hoping Paul will eventually endorse the nominee, and bring his supporters into the Romney camp, they don't know anything about the Texas congressman, who has spent his whole political career fighting the very forces represented by Romney and his backers.  Take it from me: It isn't going to happen.  And even if it did­if Ron Paul were suddenly possessed by an evil spirit­he wouldn't bring very many of his supporters with him.  His followers are just like him: principled, cantankerous, and uninterested in merging with the "mainstream."

The GOP hierarchy thinks it has Paul over a barrel.  By holding his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), hostage, the wags inform us that Paul is unlikely to launch a third-party campaign, because it would supposedly end Rand's career.

Maybe, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.  This isn't just a political campaign­it's a cause.  The many followers who have been recruited to his banner are expecting something more than a fizzle-out in Tampa.  They have put their hearts and souls­and, more significantly (for libertarians), their cash­into this effort, and they aren't going to be happy with some anticlimactic end to the Ron Paul story.  They want closure.  They want to know they at least did everything they could to avoid the apocalypse Paul has spent the last 30 years or so warning us about: an economic downturn that will make the crash of '08 look like child's play, and the end of liberty in America.

In my view, a third-party campaign by Paul is the logical outcome of his entire career: After being rejected by a GOP mutated beyond recognition, he and his brigades of fervent followers will not be content until they've stormed the gates of the federal Leviathan and made a good-faith attempt at bringing the monster down.  It will be Paul's last hurrah­and, perhaps, the last hurrah of our Old Republic.

This article first appeared in the March 2012 issue of Chronicles: A Magazine of American CultureClick here to subscribe, so you won't miss one of Justin Raimondo's exclusive columns!

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/02/13/ron-pauls-last-hurrah/