This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Ron Paul

  • Duff believes Ventura; smears Kyle

    Yeah, big surprise, but Gordon Duff thinks that Chris Kyle’s story about punching Jesse Ventura TFO is a right wing conspiracy against Ventura. Why? Well, Duff should know, he claims he was a sniper in Vietnam, so he knows;

    Part of my time in Vietnam was spent as a sniper. In real life, and this is how we have to be, snipers are seen as “backshooting cowards” by the rest of the military.

    Even with the old equipment we had, I could hit 3 people, “pink mist,” before they knew it from so far away it would take them an hour to get there, terrain as it is.

    I didn’t like it, it felt “dishonorable” to me but this is just my opinion.

    Yeah, it’s easy to call the occupation “dishonorable” when he was never a sniper. You forget we saw your records, Gordon. you were a rifleman for four months until you became a TOC-RAT gopher. You only spent 18 months in the USMC – that’s hardly enough time to even begin training let alone be the type of sniper he claims to be.

    So the rest of the crap in the article about him being a ninja-boxer dude (despite the fact that he claims he’s 100% disabled) is probably bullshit, too.

    And he keeps calling Kyle “Kris Kyle”, but it’s really Chris Kyle, i know because I bothered to read the book, which Duff admits that he never will, but that doesn’t stop Duff from criticizing Kyle;

    Military service is a trap, the more “special” or “secret” the bigger the trap and, as so many know, the more unstable and purely delusional those around you can get, especially “leadership” such as it is.

    Anyway, who am I to judge?

    Exactly, Duff, who are you to judge with your extensive 18 months of military service?

    I am not so sure I believe Mr. Kyle, which, since he presents himself as a SEAL, dishonors all SEALS. Marines would have shut his lip long ago.

    He is a SEAL, Duff, not “presenting himself” as one. I checked on him, just like I checked on you.

    Just because you like Ventura and Ron Paul, that doesn’t mean Kyle is lying, it just makes you hard-headed and incapable of accepting things that don’t fit your world view. You forgot to mention that the Mossad probably put Kyle up to punching Ventura. that was the only bit of regular bullshit we’ve come to expect from your ignorant ass…er mouth.

  • Stuck in the middle with you

    Nimnil extraordinaire, Justin Raimondo at Anti-War.com, who has been a flake for a very long time, linked to our Note To Paul Rieckhoff in his piece defending Jesse Thorsen. Raimondo claims that he’s a Libertarian, one of those Ron Paul Libertarians who touch the line with anarchists, so it’s natural that he’d defend Thorsen, because Thorsen supports Paul. But Raimondo, who was born four years before me and was certainly eligible for the draft during Vietnam, somehow avoided service according to his Wiki-bio.

    Typically, for those who haven’t served, the Thorsen discussion is about freedom of speech, but it really shouldn’t be…it’s about the laws that govern behavior among members of the military. And it was against the laws that govern members of the military for Thorsen to take to the stage and endorse Ron Paul…it was against those laws for him to even be present at the rally in his uniform. But raimondo doesn’t see it that way;

    Soldiers are allowed to “participate in some political activities” – as long as they are the right people participating in the right political activities. After all, in 1970 Al Gore campaigned in military uniform with his father, Albert Gore, Sr.; Richard Nixon campaigned in uniform, touting his status as “Lt. Commander Richard M. Nixon,” against Helen Gahagan Douglas;

    Yeah, 50 years ago was like three generations of military regulations ago. I’m sure Raimondo would would crap himself if members of the military began publicly supporting Romney or Gingrich in their uniforms.

    But Raimondo does criticize Paul Rieckhoff for his bit in the Huffington Post, so we find ourselves in agreement on that portion, but I want to make it absolutely clear that this blog, in no way, shape or form, supports Thorsen’s actions last week, no matter who drags us into the debate.

  • Ventura denies getting punched TFO

    The other day we reported that Chris Kyle, the SEAL, told the story about how he came to make all of our dreams come true by punching loud mouth Jesse Ventura, not a SEAL. Now Ventura, understandably, is refuting the report, in that highly reputable Prison Planet, and claims that a SEAL made up the story because Ventura supports Ron Paul – yeah, it doesn’t make sense to me either. Why would one SEAL care how Ventura was intending to vote.

    “For someone to state that I would take joy and pleasure in especially one of my SEAL team mates would die, that I would enjoy that, is despicable, it’s wrong, and this never happened,” said Ventura.

    Yeah, well, I don’t see any of Kyle’s team mates coming out to defend Ventura. I don’t even know how Kyle is planning to vote in the upcoming election, for all Ventura knows he’s voting for Paul, too. That’s quite a leap to take to say Kyle made up the story to discredit Ventura for his support of the racist Ron Paul.

    I think Ventura thinks it feeds into his image of being a victim of “the system”. Now the GOP is sending SEALs out to take down Ventura. More conspiracy bullshit from the head conspiracy nutjob.

    Thanks to Old Trooper for the link.

  • More on Ron Paul’s military support

    Someone dropped off this link in the comments the other day of my post about Ron Paul’s claim that based on his donations from the military, he enjoys massive support from active duty military members. the link is to an article by JJ Jackson in that Conservative Canadian media known as the Canada Free Press. Jackson contends that if you divide the total amount of money contributed to Paul’s campaign by $1, it means only about 4.4% of the military actually supports Paul. Of course, that percentage dwindles as you get closer to the real amounts of the contributions;

    What is sad, though, is that sometimes Paulbots are able to fool enough people and parlay this phony sense of support into actual results. See the final vote count of the Iowa Caucuses where Mr. Paul netted more than 21% of the vote.

    Of course, the comments blow up with Paulians trying to discredit the formula. I couldn’t resist commenting to this;

    Well, clearly the author has some homework to do when it comes to statistics. The fallacy of the main point he attempts to make consists in the tacit assumption that all those who do not make a contribution do not support Paul. Following this reasoning, it would seem that some 90% of the military have no political preferences at all, given that Paul received more contributions from the sector than all other GOP candidates combined and more than Obamao.

    The most reliable measure of one’s preferences is one supported with one’s cash. Preferences of those who contribute are then extrapolated over those who don’t. There is nothing inappropriate about it, unless the author has convincing evidence that noncontributing soldiers are distributed in a significantly different manner. Arguing that they all are against Ron Paul is plain silly and rather embarrassing.

    My question;

    How is that different from the Paulbots implying that Paul gets more money from the military than any other candidate because the military overwhelmingly supports Paul for president?

    The answer, of course;

    The difference goeas [sic] back to sampling. Since you have no reasonable way to ask all military whom they want as President, you take some of them who revealed their preferences and then say that the sample distribution is roughly the same as the population distribution (i.e., how the military would vote as a whole).

    What? I guess he means that the sampling can only be correctly construed by Paulbots, as long as it ends up in their favor. There’s no way to accurately call donations to Paul “overwhelming support” for him from the military given all of the outliers, like people who donate less than $1000 who don’t have to list their occupation, or the fact that Paulians are known to be devious enough to call themselves members of the military when they aren’t just to inflate the perception.

    Hey, Paulians, extrapolate this.

  • On military donors supporting Ron Paul

    We all heard Ron Paul say the other day, while introducing Corporal Jesse Thorsen to the crowd in Iowa, that he receives more monetary donations from service members than any other candidate. Yesterday, an old friend from a previous forum, where I was banned, asked me if this is true. In fact, ROS asked me the same question a few months back. I knew it was true, because it happened back in 2008, too, when Paul got 99 donations totaling $45,500 – that’s about $460 per donor. According to Open Secrets, Paul’s military contributors have donated almost a six-figure amount;

    I remember when I looked at who specifically was donating to Ron Paul from the military, his largest donor was some POG in California who had never deployed, and actually had got out of the National Guard the year before to help run a Ron Paul campaign office near San Francisco. But he had identified himself as an employee of the military on his donor form.

    Paul has raised over $12 million last year, so less than a hundred grand is almost meaningless. Who among us had money that we were willing to spend on a political campaign while we were on active duty? I suspect that that since this whole debate depends on the donor to identify his/her occupation, there’s an opportunity for dishonesty…but we know that the Ron Paul supporters are as honest as the day is long.

    Of course, that’s sarcasm. They can’t even be honest with themselves. They always manipulate anything they can in their favor – even in Drudge’s exit poll of the Iowa caucus on Tuesday.

    So, at this point, Ron Paul can say truthfully that he receives more in donations from the military than any other candidate, but we can also remain skeptical, thanks, as always, to his lunatic supporters who split their time between trolling blogs and spraying their yards with vinegar.

  • Paulians keeping us safe from chemtrails

    This is the first I’ve heard of this preposterous practice. I mean, I know there are cranks who think we’re being poisoned by the Jews’ chemtrails, but I’d never heard that those same cranks would spray vinegar at them. Someone on Facebook linked to this blogger at Republican Party Animals who posted this video of an actual Paulian who posts video proof that spraying vinegar at chemtrails make them break up…well, if you wait long enough.

    The exact same blogger Some pirate Leftist posts the exact same article at Daily Kos but calls the Paulians “Tea Party Patriots”, of course.

    The chatter has gotten so bad, the folks who run the Daily Paul are threatening the chemtrail cranks with a ban hammer;

    I guess I can be flip about this because I don’t get many chemtrails over the TAH corporate retreat (one of the benefits of being a proud Zionist Bilderberger)…that’s probably why I’m not fricken crazy.

  • Cpl. Jesse D. Thorsen reviewed

    Streetsweeper dropped a link in the post below about Cpl. Jesse D. Thorsen, Ron Paul’s “multiple tour, 10-year veteran” supporter. The link is to Gentlemen’s Quarterly and their investigation of the doofus who went on stage in support of Ron Paul the other night wearing his ACUs. Apparently, Thorsen’s 10 years were interrupted by a four year break in service from 2005 and 2009, so his ten years drops to six years.

    During his break in service, he managed to get arrested for “burglary, grand theft of a firearm, and carrying a concealed weapon” which got him 30 months of probation in July 2005. He broke his probation conditions twice. And, oh, his “multiple tours” in the war against terror turns out be one trip to Afghanistan.

    GQ concludes;

    The statement did confirm the following details about Thorsen:

    – Cpl. Jesse D. Thorsen is, as stated in his interviews, 28 years of age.
    – He is with a Engineer Company out of Des Moines, IA, and his unit falls
    under the 416th Theater Engineer Command out of Darien, IL.
    – His official MOS is 12N – Heavy Construction Worker, and is filling a
    Combat Engineer slot (12B), but is not currently qualified for the Military Occupational Specialty.
    – Cpl. Thorsen joined the military (Florida National Guard) on July 31, 2001, and joined the Army Reserve in 2009.
    – He has deployed once in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in 2009.
    – He was not in an active status during his participation in the Iowa caucus yesterday.

    It looks like there are two new items here. Paul introduced Thorsen as a multi-tour veteran, but the Army says he only did one tour in Afghanistan. The statement also says that Thorsen “was not in an active status during his participation in the Iowa caucus.” That was certainly not how Paul characterized him, and service records obtained today show him serving in the Army Reserve in Des Moines, Iowa, “October 2011 to present.”

    They also called his unit who responded that “His unit is discussing things with him and have asked him not to comment further on the event.”

    I’m pretty sure it’s a one-way discussion and a lot of “WTF were you thinking, numbnuts?” Nothing like stomping on your dick to a national audience while wearing your nametag.

    ADDED: Chief Tango sends us a link from Big Government which reports that Thorsen is being investigated. And, oh, he has a fan page at Facebook and the illness is strong in the comments.

  • So tired of the “chickenhawk” thing

    Yeah, so Ron Paul thinks he can resonate among the anti-war turds by calling Newt Gingrich a “chickenhawk”, meaning that Gingrich avoided the draft during Vietnam, but supports a robust military and somehow supported the wars in the Middle East, even though Gingrich was out of of office since the 90s. From CNN;

    “He’s probably as aggressive with the military as anybody,” Paul said on Fox News. “He supports all the wars in the Middle East a thousand times more than I would. But you know in the nineteen-sixties when I was drafted in the military, he got several deferments. He chose not to go. Now he’ll send our kids to war.”/

    That “when I was drafted” line is troubling. Paul served in the Air Force and as Steve Bussey points out, the Air Force has never had a draft. So, what is Paul trying to say, that he was drafted but enlisted in the Air Force to avoid the Army? That was fairly common practice, for those of you who may not know…people even enlisted in the Army and took a three year hitch in order to get the job they wanted rather than take a crap shoot with the draft.

    Regardless, Paul was in the military during the sixties, hs record said he did a two-year hitch from 1963 until 1965. Johnson first sent combat formations to Vietnam in 1965, so Paul missed Vietnam and sat it out in a Reserve unit until he was discharged in 1968. Not that there’s anything wrong with any of that – until he uses that to assume some sort of moral authority in the discussion.

    I thought all of that draft dodger, chickenhawk shit was dead after we elected Bill Clinton who took such extreme measures to avoid being drafted that he lied about his intentions and preferred study behind the Iron Curtain to military service. And we now have a President who never considered military service. Bill Clinton ramped up operations in Somalia without giving the troops what they needed to win there. He fired off cruise missiles like the Fourth of July at anything moved and got us involved in Kosovo and Bosnia. So where was the chickenhawk label? The current president is doing the same with drones and can’t even bring himself to salute properly.

    The same people who called George W Bush a “chickenhawk” for his service in the Texas National Guard during the Vietnam War are now applauding Ron Paul’s assertion that everyone is a draft dodger except him, and Paul spent his Vietnam years in the Reserves. Like I said, there’s nothing wrong with serving in the reserve forces during Vietnam…if you did, you were in uniform which is a damn sight better than the last two Democrat presidents could bring themselves to accomplish, but don’t try to make it sound like you faced down the Viet Cong Tet Offensive all by your lonesome when the only thing you defended was Fort Living Room and Firebase Refrigerator.

    Thanks to melony for the link to Bussey’s blog.