Tag: Ron Paul

Categories
Accountability political challengers

The FUBAR State

Newt Gingrich came from behind for a smashing victory in South Carolina’s primary last Saturday. And yet a more interesting story may be emerging in Iowa: Rick Santorum, not Romney, is apparently the Republican caucus winner. Though that’s not counting the eight precincts whose official results forms went missing.Iowa counties

This could be just another typical screw-​up. Democracy means “rule by the people,” and “the people” aren’t perfect.

Foul-​ups happen.

On the other hand, the whole thing smacks of back-​room manipulation. The fact that the official tabulations were moved away from the traditional site, GOP state party headquarters, to an undisclosed location — allegedly to “protect” the vote-​counting from Occupy protest influence — makes the uncertain results all the more suspect.

And Republicans can’t blame this on Occupiers.

The winner may have been the biggest loser. Santorum got the proverbial bump from the initial Iowa results — losing by a mere handful, it was reported — but Romney received a bump from it too, simply by being declared a winner in the closest caucus race in American history. By “losing control” of the actual count, the Republican Party of Iowa skewed the national election.

Leading into the caucuses, Ron Paul’s supporters sniffed something conspiratorial in the vote count location switch, complaining that such a move could help “disenfranchise” Paul’s supporters, knowing that GOP caucus officials were not at all friendly toward his candidacy.

You’re probably familiar with Stalin’s most famous quote about democracy: “It’s not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes.”

In Iowa, Stalin’s shade sports a mischievous grin.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets ideological culture political challengers

New Orbits for Old

A recent study using something called “gravitational microlensing” suggests that every star has at least one planet. There are a lot of planets out there. So there “must” be Earth-​similar planets. And “therefore” life. Intelligent life. And, and, and …

Back on Earth, the search for intelligence amongst the Republican presidential candidates (not to mention the Democratic incumbent) is a more haphazard affair. We lack that crucial microlensing.
Mars, the red planet
Yesterday I noted a peculiar alignment: Ron Paul defending Mitt Romney, with the other Republican wannabes piling against Romney in a disgraceful showing of anti-​capitalism. Rep. Paul defended Romney not out of Republican loyalty, but out of principle. Does this suggest an affinity between the two, heretofore unnoticed?

Maybe. On the face of it, Romney doesn’t seem all that dissimilar from Barack Obama – not in foreign policy, surely not in big government instincts (the purveyors of unconstitutional medical regulations, each) — but his work in business does suggest that Romney might be an improvement on Obama, if elected. Marginally moving towards Paul’s apogee.

But the country needs more than just a marginal improvement, right now. Another centrist — even one who understands the social utility of the hostile takeover — won’t balance budgets. Not when the Washington orbit remains retrograde, unable to stop spending and borrowing like tomorrow is somebody else’s problem.

Which is why Ron Paul’s candidacy will retain traction for many primaries to come. Since our problems are the mainstream, Paul fills the need for something extra-mainstream — and, to normal political folks, that will undoubtedly seem “extra-​terrestrial.”

In Washington, all intelligent life lies beyond the usual orbits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets ideological culture national politics & policies

Firing People for Fun & Profit

After winning the New Hampshire primary last night, Mitt Romney charged that “some desperate Republicans” have joined forces with President Obama “to put free enterprise on trial.”

Newt Gingrich calls Romney a “vulture capitalist” and blasted his work as CEO of Bain Capital as “bankrupting companies and laying off employees.” Rick Perry snidely attacked Mitt for “all the jobs that he killed,” adding “I’m sure he was worried he would run out of pink slips.”
Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney
A Wall Street Journal report quoted Jon Huntsman: “What is clear is [Mr. Romney] likes firing people.”

So, did Romney say “I like being able to fire people”? What he said was, “I want individuals to have their own insurance. That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep you healthy. It also means if you don’t like what they do, you can fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me.”

I, too, like being able to fire companies who don’t adequately supply the services I demand.

Yet, what about Romney’s work at Bain Capital?

Bain Capital took firms having trouble making a profit and attempted to make them more profitable. Sometimes that meant cutting back the work force to avoid bankruptcy, where everyone would lose their jobs. Sometimes it meant cutting up a company and its assets and selling them to entrepreneurs who could do better.

Not all businesses succeed. No surprise, then, that politicians used to spending a seemingly unlimited supply of other people’s money regardless of performance fail to understand this simple reality.

To his credit, Ron Paul defended Romney, saying of Gingrich, Huntsman and Perry, “I think they’re wrong. They are either just demagoguing or they don’t have the vaguest idea how the market works.”

Or both.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
media and media people political challengers

And the President Is …

Unless our elections are rigged, Congressman Ron Paul — like anyone else running for president — has a bona fide chance to win.

Because we regular people get to decide. It’s our votes; it’s our caucuses.

So, why does the news media keep telling us that Ron Paul has no shot?

A brand new Public Policy Polling survey shows Paul leading the pack in Iowa at 23 percent to Mitt Romney’s 20 percent, with Gingrich falling precipitously to 14 percent.

Queried about a possible Paul victory in Iowa, Fox News’s Chris Wallace responded, “Well, and the Ron Paul people aren’t going to like me saying this, but, to a certain degree, it will discredit the Iowa caucuses because, rightly or wrongly, I think most of the Republican establishment thinks he is not going to end up as the nominee.”

Hmmm. Ron Paul can’t win. So, if he does win, it discredits the process.

It’s déjà-​vu all over again: GOP strategist Mike Murphy said back in August that had Congressman Paul received just 75 more votes and won the Iowa straw poll “it would have put the straw poll out of business forever.”

According to a Washington Times story, “Paul could be positioning himself as a spoiler or worse.”

A spoiler? Worse? Dr. Paul is positioning himself as the next president. Which I guess spoils things for Wallace, much of the media and the Washington establishment.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption national politics & policies

A Newt Public-​Private Partnership

For nine years, from 1999 until 2008, Newt Gingrich worked helping Freddie Mac, the government – created, bubble-​creating housing corporation. Newt’s outfit, The Gingrich Group, knocked down more than $1.6 million dollars in consulting fees during that time.

Newt says he warned the government-​sponsored giant that the bubble it was busy blowing up would burst badly.

For all those years? He was either mind-​numbingly repetitive or must have really drawn out his words. He is from Georgia, but still.

Folks at Freddie tell a different story. They say former Speaker Gingrich helped “build bridges” to Republicans on Capitol Hill, hoping to prevent congressional efforts to rein in the mortgage giant. Those efforts proved successful — there was no powering down of the Frankenstein mortgage monster. The Gingrich Group’s contract wasn’t canceled until the 2008 crash, when the U.S. Treasury took control of Freddie Mac and his sister housing financier, Fannie Mae.

In last weekend’s GOP presidential debate, Congressman Ron Paul argued that Newt Gingrich’s position with Freddie Mac is “something people ought to know about.”

“While he was earning a lot of money from Freddie Mac,” explained Rep. Paul, “I was fighting, over a decade, to try to explain to people where the housing bubble was coming from.”

Newt responded that, like Dr. Paul, he wanted to audit the Fed. As for his Freddie role, “I offered strategic advice,” claimed Newt, adding, “I was in the private sector.”

Laughter erupted throughout the hall. Even Mr. Gingrich couldn’t keep a straight face.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
media and media people political challengers

The Donkey in the Room

One hates to beat a dead horse. Or a living one. But by coming back to media bias in the coverage of the Republican presidential campaign I’m not so much whipping a recalcitrant equine as stabling a kicking, braying ass.

The most recent debate was hosted by CBS and the National Journal, and took place in South Carolina. The demonstrated bias? Ron Paul got only 90 seconds of coverage.

Yup: ninety seconds out of the hour. CBS summarized Rep. Paul’s short contribution by calling him a “serious longshot,” judging the congressman’s minute-​and-​a-​half as “an unqualified success.”

Yes, CBS’s post-​debate coverage was mostly spin — over its own criteria. Of Rick Santorum, the network calmly stated that the also-​ran “didn’t get as many questions as the more popular candidates in the polls, but when he did get a chance to talk, his remarks sounded thoughtful and measured.”

Yeah. CBS was in control of the questions and time allotments, but its prose coverage neatly states it as reportage, covering up its own very active role.

A more honest account? “Barring a bomb in the Green Room taking out most if not all of the other candidates, Rick Santorum doesn’t have a chance at the nomination. Thankfully, it’s up to us to divvy up coverage. Tough luck, Rick.”

And: “Despite your amazing ten-​percent-​plus support, Dr. Paul, we don’t want you saying too much. If we allowed it, you might get more popular.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture media and media people political challengers

The Interposeurs

Media people interpose themselves between current events and the news audience. They consider it their job to sort out “the issues” before news consumers even start thinking.

This is the source of media power.

Recent investigations into current media coverage of the GOP presidential race shows that the basic media bias may not be pro-​liberal/​anti-​conservative, but, more generally, anti-​libertarian. Ron Paul’s candidacy, though receiving an amazing amount of support from enthusiastic fans and generous donors (Rep. Paul has quite a kitty going into the campaign), has garnered (according to a recent Pew Research Center study) little news coverage to match his popular success: Less, even, than Santorum.

But is ideological bias at the root of the problem? After all, each candidate has a personality, and personality is obviously a big factor in show biz success. And politics, it has been said, is show biz for homely people. No wonder political coverage looks more like junior high and high school tribalism than a truly mature enterprise.

According to the irreverent H.L. Mencken, journalists like to play messiah. Thinking they can “save the day” every day, they tend to favor those politicians who treat the eternal rescue mission of government policy with a cheaply salable scenario. Paul, in identifying government more often as a problem than a solution, horns in on the public rescue biz.

Maybe this helps explain why “Ron Paul did markedly better in the blogosphere than in the press.” And why journalistic coverage swings more extremely than does blogosphere coverage.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall media and media people

What the Media Misses

The big news story last week became the media’s non-​coverage of the Ron Paul campaign. After Jon Stewart of The Daily Show successfully brought out the full nature of the media prejudice, it became the story.

That’s how bias backfires. Trying to keep Ron Paul out of the headlines led to putting Ron Paul in the headlines.

How easily a conspiracy of silence turns into a deafening noise.

Media bigots think they are doing a public service when they pick winners and throw out losers before almost anyone has even heard from the challengers. They consider it their job.

Undoubtedly they look at Ron Paul’s platform and say to themselves “This guy doesn’t fit into the normal left-​right spectrum, or even neatly into his own party. That makes him unelectable. So we won’t talk about him.” This points to media’s true power: establishing what’s worth talking about.

Trouble is, by rushing to judgment against Paul, they miss the day’s major story: Paul’s appeal transcends usual party lines. It’s not just a tiny cadre of libertarians on his side, it’s conservatives and liberals and exes of both persuasions; it’s centrists who’ve never heard anyone talk about the Federal Reserve before; it’s peaceniks who are serious about ending America’s wars.

It might even be that strong core of American society that still respects honesty and consistency.

The media has missed this elsewhere, too: In repeated recalls and initiatives around the country.

Cover the big story, folks. Not just your own spin.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
media and media people political challengers

The Ron Paul Problem

Prior to the Iowa Straw Poll, its credibility and repute were proclaimed throughout the land. The Washington Post characterized it as “arguably the first major vote of the 2012 presidential contest.”

Then came Saturday’s results in Ames: Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul finished first and second, respectively, with Paul only 152 votes and less than a percentage point behind Bachmann, no other candidate coming anywhere close.

So, mainstream analysts now call it a three-​way race — with Mr. Paul not one of the three!

A story in USA Today postponed mere mention of Congressman Paul till the 13th paragraph: “Candidates Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Herman Cain are also seeking the Republican presidential nomination.”

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” GOP strategist Mike Murphy laments that “If 75 people had changed their minds, [Ron Paul] would have won the Iowa straw poll, which would have kind of shaken up the race and it would have put the straw poll out of business forever.”

Out of business? Forever? What sort of electoral contest should or would be abolished if a certain candidate wins?

Murphy’s statement generated neither rebuttal nor even any notice from the folks on the program.

“One reason the bipartisan establishment finds Paul so obnoxious is how much the past four years have proven him correct — on the housing bubble, on the economy, on our foreign misadventures, and on our national debt,” wrote Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney.

In other words, time to ignore him.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies porkbarrel politics

Good and Bad in the 112th

The 112th Congress is beginning to take shape, and, well, we have good news and bad news.

Good news first: Ron Paul has been slated to chair the Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee.

The Texas congressman has been toiling away at the margins of power on Capitol Hill for years. A proponent of a gold standard and a free-​marketer of the “Austrian” School, he has been a voice crying in the wilderness. One of the few people in Congress who did not treat Alan Greenspan as a divine oracle, he is now one of Ben Bernanke’s harshest critics. 

Of course, after recent events and bailouts and all, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke has lots of critics.

As chair of the subcommittee that watches over the Fed, Ron Paul has finally attained a position to accomplish something. This is a major reversal in the power structure. We can’t expect miracles (Ron Paul being but one man), but do expect fireworks.

Now, the bad news. 

It’s been less than a month since Republicans in the House voted on a moratorium on earmarks. And already they are, reportedly, beginning to feel queasy. Perhaps as a sign of a general turncoatish nature, the next chair of the House Appropriations Committee is set to be Rep. Hal Rogers.

Sixteen-​term congressman Rogers has earned a reputation for pushing pork. His hometown has received so much federal largesse it’s called “Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood.”

Still, he says he’ll enforce the pork moratorium. We’ll see.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.