E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
WEBSTER CITY, Iowa -– Ron Paul spoke to over 50 people at a town hall on Friday in the Webster City Fire Station, the hometown of his Iowa Campaign Chair Drew Ivers.
Commenting on the support he is getting in Iowa, Paul said, “Last night, we had a few students come out at the university, like 1,300! I don’t go in there with wild promises.”
Paul stressed the importance of the early voting states candidates like him and told them their “single vote” is a hundred fold benefit compared to the vote in California.
“A state like this as well as New Hampshire allows opportunities for candidates like myself to come out and meet people and talk about the issues in a more deliberate fashion because there won't be very many states, once this thing gets rolling, once the first two primaries are done in Iowa and New Hampshire, once they're done, you know it is really, really a rat race.”
He said “you can’t run a campaign without the money,” and that for him, “fortunately, fundraising has been rather easy.”
“I've never been really good, I'm very enthusiastic about our message, but I've never been very good, and people who work with me in campaigns think I'm not very good at calling people up, like I don't do it and ask them 'Send me money. Send me money.' I always work on the assumption, if the message is worthwhile, they'll send some money."
Paul talked little about the economy and more about foreign policy, stressing his belief that bringing the troops home is the easiest way to cut spending. He also warned the audience about upcoming war with Syria and Iran.
“We plan now to go into Syria and the plan, matter of fact, the covert war or war has already started in Iran. I mean, we have our CIA agents in there, we’re trying to overthrow that government, our drone plane just the other day was shot down. They captured some of our CIA agents. War has already started. I would say that, that does not help us. It furthering our bankruptcy. It makes us more in danger.”
Speaking about the president’s press conference yesterday where he told reporters “nothing is off the table,” with Iran, Paul said that really means a nuclear attack.
“Nothing off the table means military, bombing and actually nuclear first strikes. That’s what usually it means that we want to reserve and intimidate people and say nuclear first strikes, not off the table. You know what, they have taken one thing off the table and that’s diplomacy. And I would say in a civilized society, that should be the first thing which we should try. That’s what we are admonished to try as Christians, that we should talk to our enemies and try to deal with them.”
One woman asked Paul about a provision in the Defense Authorization Bill and the ability of the federal government to indefinitely detain American citizens.
“It goes against the First and Fourth Amendment -– that you don’t have to give a judge to write a search warrant and they have one of these sneak and peak searches in your house. If you tell anyone about it –- you can go to prison. So that’s an attack on the first amendment. And what she’s talking about is that it passed the senate overwhelmingly –- and that is -– the battlefield for terrorism which is everyplace and any place and you can pick people and arrest him. But the battlefield specifically is everyone in this country too. If you could be associated with an organization that might have contributed and been involved with Muslims. You could be suspect and you could be thrown in jail. And it’s actually written that the president must try them in a military and they can be held forever. You can be hauled off to Guantanamo even if you are an American citizen.”
Paul called that provisions “very dangerous” and said “some people have compared this to the enabling act in Nazi Germany to say that literally that the way that the law should read that we should virtually give up our 5th amendment rights of the rule of law and our lives can be taken without the due process of law.”
He told the audience that if someone is against this provision, they will be labeled.
"It’s always couched in the tune of -– you don’t like this -– you don’t care about terrorism -– blame America! They twist it around and say that you’re not a patriot -– that's why they called it the Patriot Act -– because if you didn’t vote for it, you were unpatriotic.”
He also addressed a question about his support for Israel, saying he is for the sovereignty of the country which means no foreign aid.
“It actually helps Israel ... Israel’s neighbors get seven times as much as Israel gets, so it really doesn’t help Israel. And you know, the other day somebody came to my defense and they explained Zionism, in an article, and they said the two basic principles of Zionism is independence and self reliance. And even this year, Netanyahu gave a speech on the House floor, you know, in Congress and said that we do not need American troops to defend ourselves, we can take care of ourselves.”
Leave a Comment:
He will win Iowa...
I'll believe it when I see it.
I don't know Paul - df may be onto something.
Ron has exceptional organization there and a cult like following.
It could happen...
One thing is for sure - he will NEVER win the nomination.
The organization thing is another I'll believe when I see. Four years ago he had nothing but a horde of internet warriors. No real ground organization. Anyone ever hear any names of his state coordinators? I haven't. Doesn't mean he doesn't have them, but I remember four years ago his New Hampshire "leadership" was just a couple college kids working as volunteers.
Of course that gets into the speculation that ground organization is less important these days. Interesting line of discussion. But in the end, when you need to get your supporters to the polls... in short, I'll believe it isn't important when I see that, too.
"The organization thing is another I'll believe when I see"
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Paul's Army Eyes an Iowa Caucus Upset
The 76-year-old Paul has always been dismissed as something of a curio within GOP establishment circles and among many voters, but in an unsettled year he has a legitimate chance to crash the party and capture the Iowa caucuses. He registered 17% in this week's TIME/CNN/ORC poll, behind just Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, and a jump from the 12% he registered a month earlier. The irony of his climb is that Paul, the most unconventional politician in the field, is making headway by running perhaps the most conventional campaign of any Republican presidential hopeful. Numerous Republican insiders, including Governor Terry Branstad, have cited Paul's infrastructure as the best in the state. "He has the most extensive organization, the most passionate people," says Tim Albrecht, Branstad's spokesman. "It's impressive that he's up to 18%. All he needs is maybe another 6% to win the Iowa caucuses. He just needs to grow a little bit."
Four years ago, Paul's fan base was brimming with fervor but sloppily organized; this time, his campaign is not just motivated, but meticulously organized. "Ron Paul is definitely an undervalued stock," concedes an Iowa aide for a rival campaign.
http://swampland.time.com/2011/12/09/ron-pauls-army-eyes-an-iowa-caucus-upset/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He can be a player at the convention just by winning the caucuses...and he WILL win the caucus in Iowa. They do not like Mitt, and Newton has no organization to speak of at all....
Well, I have to admit, having the governor's office repeat the claim is a pretty strong debating point.
We'll see how it plays out.
Newt and Mitt may devour each other between now and Iowa. But, I don't think you'll see too many hard right Republicans or T-Pubs falling in line to vote for Paul.
He's just not their kinda guy
Actually it's funny you say that, fuzzy. The original tea party focus was libertarian. Ron Paul has been called the intellectual Godfather of the movement.
Actually, I've done some poking around on this. The earliest modern instance I can find of anyone making a tax point by referencing the Boston Tea Party was in my neck of the woods. It was a local Libertarian Party tax day (April 15th) annual protest, about 10 years ago, in which tea bags were given out with flyers to people on the way to the Post Office.
But, granted, in the months since it has pretty convincingly shed its libertarian origins.
dangerfield, when Ron IN asked for predictions for 2012, I went out on a limb and said Paul would win Iowa. It was a half-hearted prediction based on the idea that Gingrich would implode, that conservatives who hate the idea of lobbyists and flip floppers would see Paul as the only viable alternative to Romney who has less support among IA GOPers now than in 2008.
I still think it's possible Paul could win but it depends on how much of Gingrich's baggage gets re-aired and whether those voters discard the notion Newt represents what they are against and hold their noses at the Caucus.
One other point where Paul has the advantage is his state-wide organization. Neither Gingrich or Romney have much of a staff. Despite what David Yepsen said and he's a smart man who has followed the Iowa caucus for years, it takes a strong organization to motivate voters to the caucus. It takes constant phone calls, door knocking and leg work to convince people to spend a couple hours of their evening to raise their hands, divide into groups. If one candidate doesn't have enough people there, it takes people who can convince them to join their group for another candidate.
It is funny, They've shifted so far to the right they forgot their original agenda.
No doubt. I knew the focus was morphing when the local "Tea Party" picked up the illegal immigration issue. If you follow the issue, yes, I'm from that county. Libertarians tend to favor open borders (though in context of dismantling so many public services like schools, that only people with jobs would want to cross the Rio Grande). I knew something was amiss when they became among the strongest proponents of our county's focus on rooting out illegal immigrants.
I love him for saying things like this--who on the left would go out on a limb like this? He's absolutely right that after 9/11 people were intimidated into
I hope he does win Iowa and wins enough delegates for the Pugs to have a brokered convention. That would be a hoot and I hope they grow enough popcorn to keep me and Feisty satisfied!
Living in Iowa, I can say that article is a pretty accurate description of Paul's organization. The GOP candidates who discount the need for a strong organization, a lot of volunteers didn't pay attention to how President Obama won Iowa's caucus. He didn't just rely on auto-mated robo-calls, or the internet; he had offices in nearly every town with a moderate population including where I live. He had lots of volunteers knocking on doors, making phone calls, driving people to their caucus site. The other democratic candidates also had local offices or heads working from their home but Obama out organized all the other candidates and it paid off.
Jack, although I'd never vote for Ron Paul, I do like his straight-talking on things like the Patriot Act.
Grrrrrrrrrr! Timed out on me. Here's the full text of what I meant to write.
I love him for saying things like this--who on the left would go out on a limb like this?
He's absolutely right that after 9/11 people were intimidated into supporting the war in Afghanistan, and later Iraq. I'm still rankled by Bush's half-truth: "They hate us for our way of life." This was a way of manipulating the public's emotions that much more. The full sentence should have been: "They hate the impact that our way of life has on them and their families." If he had said that we could have had a real debate about whether we should have gone to war.
But anyone who tried to say that back in those days was immediately shouted down by people like O'Reilly and Limbaugh, who said we were excusing the actions of the terrorists. Not so. And so it's good to hear Ron Paul bring these points to the fore again.
Not that I will vote for him, but still--it takes courage to say these things, even today.
Paul M. Not to get personal or ask specifics but what state do you live in? You don't have to answer but just wondering what state your "neck of the woods" might be.
Hillary won the popular vote (minus the caucus #'s) in 2008, but the caucus states won the nomination for the President, so the candidates who ignore the caucuses do so at their own peril...
Jody, not a problem. I'm in Virginia.
I don't think "flip" (Mitt) or "flop" (Newt) are going to be able to talk themselves out of their multiple positions forever. Ron Paul 2012.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1RKPfMqGOg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
You can agree or disagree about what Dr. Paul says. But he does have a loyal following. Including a lot who post on FR!
So did Jim Jones...
Those are mostly libertarians, though. They are very loyal. But the Republican Party isn't libertarian.
I don't mean that to sound like a slam on Ron Paul or his supporters. I'm pretty close to libertarian myself. Ron Paul is only there because he knows the path to a major office isn't through the Libertarian Party.
LOL Drink the Kool-Aid my children, it's what is GOOD for you!
Spoken with a James Earl Jones voice
If there was even a remote chance of Ron Paul winning the Presidency we'd all be living the stone age.
I'll give Paul this, he probably is the most honest of all the politicians running on that side and some of what he says in the area of foreign policy makes absolute sense. Other things he stands for are way off the bizzaro meter, hence I would never support him for President. I am glad that his viewpoint is out there and getting a hearing though.
Yeah and we all know how that turned out.
May I suggest to the Paul fathiful to not drink the koolaid.
Oh Beverly, you are so misguided. How would a return to the founding principles of our Republic be comparable to living in the stone age? Just because the Federal government would return to doing it's job and not the States' job doesn't mean the world will end. At least you made me laugh a little today. Thank you!
Ron Paul would demolish Barry Obama in any election.
I don't care for Ron Paul's positions on eliminating the EPA, HUD, the Dept. of Education, and the elimination of some others, but I think he is as close to an honest politician running for the Whitehouse as you will see for a long time. I might vote for him as I believe the Congress will be able to restrain his ability to eliminate whole cabinet departments.
I don't think any of the other Republican candidates in the lead have even 1/100 of 1% of Dr. Paul's intergrity. The only other candidate worth looking at is Jon Huntsman, and most view him as not viable for the Presidential nomination.
Paul/Huntsman 2012
"once the first two primaries are done in Iowa and New Hampshire, once they're done, you know it is really, really a rat race.”
So I guess what's going on now is only "really" a rat race - not "really, REALLY" a rat race. Ah, well.....may the best rat win.
"And I would say in a civilized society, that should be the first thing which we should try. That’s what we are admonished to try as Christians, that we should talk to our enemies and try to deal with them.”
Oh, yeah.....now that'll go over big with conservatives.....or isn't it considered "appeasement" if they do it?
There was a movie about a very smart rat years ago.......................................................................
the name of the movie was................WILLARD
pretty creepy huh?
If you want to see something creepier, check out the posters for the more recent re-make. Willard the rat guy looks remarkably like Willard the political weathervane.
Love your new avatar Joanne PA!
Anyone who would vote for Ron Paul in the primary, would not vote Romney in the general. Gingrich, I'm not so sure. Gosh, it's difficult predicting what Republicans will do.
fuzzy44
There was a movie about a very smart rat years ago.......................................................................
the name of the movie was................WILLARD
pretty creepy huh?
Yes fuzzy
Creepy but true; Willard Mitt Romney is a rat.
Thanks, Amy! Thought I'd give everyone a break from the world's most adorable kitties. Besides, I love the song and 'tis the season and all that.
Paul M - Hmmm......you know, you might be onto something here:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3333536256/tt0310357
Amy - not sure if Repubs know what they are doing. In fact, I know they don't know .
all this talk about avatars today, I decided on an old favorite
Me too!
This was McNasty doing his best iguana imitation.. lol
My gal JoJo needs one ... it's hard to cruise a grey square.
LOL NICE ONE!! tee-hee
Amy said: Anyone who would vote for Ron Paul in the primary, would not vote Romney in the general. Gingrich, I'm not so sure. Gosh, it's difficult predicting what Republicans will do.
Amy, you should try it from the conservative end when it comes to trying to figure out what Republicans will do. They drive me batty.
All she has to do is Google horses ass - there are plenty to chose from! ;o)
Thanks! I still wonder WTF why he was trying to grope the President??? lol
Then we have BB here, whos avatar is the view from his cell - must of done some favors to get a room with a 'view'...
gone to practice my heehaw Feisty ... see you next week.
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said Thursday evening that Bush administration officials were gleeful after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because it gave them a pretext to invade Iraq.
"Just think of what happened after 9/11. Immediately before there was any assessment there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq," the Texas Republican told a group of mostly young backers in Iowa. He went on to suggest officials are now setting the stage for an invasion of Iran.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57340277-503544/ron-paul-9-11-prompted-glee-in-bush-administration/?tag=stack
It's hard for me to square Republicans who voted to reelect George W. also voting for Ron Paul, but politics isn't rational, I guess.
You guys have no idea what building that is and in what city. Since the avatar photo is so small you can't make out the details. The angle on the bottom is a raised interstate, not part of the building at all. It was the only way I could catch the building in the photo. That building was built for the 1984 Worlds Fair in New Orleans. The upper portion was an observation deck. There's a great view of the Mississippi river and all of New Orleans. Now the building is simply an office building housing several companies. It's around 24 stories tall.
Now some of you know that it's not a prison tower. If you find a photo of the New Orleans skyline you will see it.
You guys have no idea what building that is and in what city
My guess was prison guard tower too! One doesn't associate New Orleans with grey.
Now me, I'm promoting my state! We need the tourist dollars.
I feel so sorry for all the people who live in and around those primary states. They have all those horrible commercials to watch. It would drive me around the bend.
Thus my large collection of DVD's.
PVR anyone? - don't forget the popcorn!
GWNO ... I got to watch quite a lot of that type of ad when I was down in California last year ... they butcher both the mind and the soul. Nice to be home again.
Great White, What do you mean? These should be funnier than SuperBowl commercials :)
fuzzy - I don't watch those either! What is it with Americans and football?
Don't tell me.... its like Canadians and HOCKEY!
Gotta love les Canadiens!
Actually what is is with Canadians and that thing called curling (a sport really???).
Idealogy - its ALWAYS nice to be home!
KSW - actually - that is a Scottish "sport" - another thing I don't participate in.
@Great
Scottish maybe but our friends to the north seem to have taken to like a duck in water..... I travel to Canada regularly for business and that is all that is ever on TV....
@Idealogy if you don't like US politics so much why do you even care....
ksw - now that you mention it, the reason I care is because what happens south of our border impacts us MIGHTILY! Your crazy banking/mortgage problems have cost our country and me personally dearly. Maybe you don't realize that the world we now live in so so very intregrated that what happens here directly affects all of us. That is one thing that a lot Americans don't realize. I find that Americans are navel gazers and not very well informed about what goes on around them.
KSW - what the heck channel are you watrhing - I haven't seen any curling on TV since the last Olympics.
@Great Totally understand about integration and world view. I just don't think your friend Idealogy is doing anything to contribute to the conversation except parroting the extreme lib view.. Interestingly enough the company I work for was employing outsourced functions from India. Canada stopped approving their work visas, said it was taking away jobs from Canadians.
Welcome to the club about jobs being taken away. We are dealing with the same problems here. About "lib view"- the way I look at is that if its good for America, its good for us - and it SHOULD be so vice versa. and OMG (I thought I'd never say OMG) I've never been considered a LIBERAL up here in "socialist" country.
@Great Totally agree with your point of view....
Only Rick Santorum and Dr. Paul have yet to be the flavor of the month. I guess Ron Paul could pick up should Newt crash and burn in the next few weeks.
Fancy this - the ultimate reality TV.
We need people like Paul in Congress. They seldom advocate a bonafide new direction, but they sure keep us from straying too far from the original path.
As an outsider - please tell me -what the H is the "original path".
This conversation didn't go far - did it?
I, not only predict that Ron Paul will win, I predict that he will be the best President we've had since Kennedy
hahahah! What else can I say.
I believe that the election equation is quite simple; if the economy does not improve, and if we continue to involve ourselves in military expansion/intervention, then Ron Paul will win due to the adverse circumstances (which he alone predicted in the past). The other candidates are for supporting the failed, corrupt establishment, and so the whole political exercise is really academic.
Ron Paul 2012
I agree that Ron Paul predicted this - but lets face it, for the U.S.
to abandon expansionism ---- it just not in your DNA.
I guess that it's "Case Closed"? If not -please let me know. (you can tell I'm a proud Canadian - I said "please"".)
For all you folks from the left consider, "Limitation is the child of dualistic thinking." and for the right "Possibility is the mother of liberation."
Ron Paul is more about defending the middle and lower classes of this country than any politician in recent history! Warned us about both the dot com bubble and the housing bubble. In 2001 warned that the housing bubble would lead to people loosing there life savings! Wants to stop incarcerating low level non-violent drug offenders (mostly lower class) wants to bring the troops home and out of dangers way (mostly lower class) Has educated the masses about the inflation tax (printing money out of thin air) which disproportionally affects people on fixed incomes and the lower and middle classes. Has battled against the bailout both bush's and obama's defending the lower and middle classes! Doesn't accept corporate donation because he represents the people. Lobbyists don't even bother to visit his office because he represents the people. I.E., the lower and middle class EQUALLY with the 1%. Bush certainly didn't do that and neither has Obama.
Peace Out
It is true that the politics of the GOP is very cheap, two faced, and full of name calling of the President. The "Party Of NO" has no new ideas, no new policies, and no concept of reality in the world.