Uncategorized
The Show
for Today:
I heart Ron Paul.
Listen live here 11-1pm.
Discussion
44 Comments
Leave a Reply
Buy Scott's Stickers
Social Bookmarks
© 2007 Stress. 
I think Ron was aware that this would be his night to shine given the pro-Liberty audience in NH. I thought he gave a very good performance (i.e. the uninitiated could “get it”). However, IMO he should work on moving towards getting his domestic agenda out there more often.
Damn Scott, in your clips there we can really here those republithug hyenas laughing at Ron Paul in the background while Chris Wallace tries to mock Ron Paul. What piles of crap they are…
guys - anyone have a full video or audio of the entire debate?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18321.htm
New article by Ron Paul
who’s in the background doin all the snickering & laughing?
What is the relationship b/w Chris Wallace and (60 minutes) Mike Wallace?
If you recall, Mike Wallace was attacked for being too soft on Ahimajead (sp?) in his 60 minutes interview.
It’s Guiliani laughing like an asshat.
Chris Wallace: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Wallace_
RP is absolutely correct about the “inflation tax”. amazing that he would be the only one (as far as I know) to speak about it
RP does not really understand the Internet. if he did, he would support ‘net neutrality’ (and not mention Bill Gates as a good example of competition and entrepreneurship)
Some in the audience are booing when RP says we should take our marching orders from the Constitution.
Can we say America: Love it or leave it?
@ Tom S. How about America: love it and FIX IT!
Hey guys,
Look at this Washington Post blog:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/09/republican_debate_winners_and.html
I left my 2 cents there and started a debacle (which seems to be what usually happens where I post, I guess that’s part of my contrarian nature).
I suspect that blog has thousands of viewers, and most of them have no idea who Paul is and what he stands for.
If we want him to go somewhere we have to start reaching them and show them why Paul is (usually) great and why he is the only hope to try to get out of the mess we are in.
Please help me out there. It’s nice to say how (usually) great Ron Paul is in this blog, but we are preaching to the chaplain in here.
Hey Scott!
Can you ask Paul about immigration? How can I call to the show?
VS: Yeah, well–that too!
I just can’t believe the audience at a Republican debate was booing the Constitution. I mean, I guess I still thought it wasn’t OK to actually be openly hostile to the Constitution.
Yeah, Jose, looks like The Fix is in.
RP does not really understand the Internet. if he did, he would support ‘net neutrality’ (and not mention Bill Gates as a good example of competition and entrepreneurship)
Mixed feelings on the Net Neutrality matter….This could just be a “benign” government pretext to get a foothold on regulating the Internet in the same of “competition.” And with this “toehold” they could grow incrementally more controlling of the net. Granted, the servers might try to act as gatekeepers by funneling traffic to select sites, but consumers could always change servers to punish those servers that engage in this noxious practice.
“This could just be a “benign” government pretext to get a foothold on regulating the Internet in the same of “competition.” And with this “toehold” they could grow incrementally more controlling of the net.”
That is what Ron Paul believes.
I wish Ron Paul would have just walked up to Guiliani and punched him right in the face. Seriously, Ron’s probably not going to win, so why not have some fun?
…Ya can’t go around punching people in the face Major Asshole…but I wouldn’t put it past you
Mace
Why are you even bothering with this guy?
…Ya can’t go around punching people in the face Major Asshole…but I wouldn’t put it past you
Well actually you can……..and I’ve had the Personal Injury Lawsuit filed against me (since settled) to prove it……..
Hannity vs. Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/015130.html
“This could just be a “benign” government pretext to get a foothold on regulating the Internet in the same of “competition.” And with this “toehold” they could grow incrementally more controlling of the net.”
Not enforcing net neutrality is tantamount to handing over the ONLY free media to the corporations and the governments and net neutrality is also the only way of giving equal access on this medium to everyone. Thus, net neutrality is crucial for the LAST medium which the Neocons and their likes do not control (much to their regret).
Guys, when Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are saying one thing about IT freedoms, and Ron Paul says the opposite and you choose to side with the latter you are becoming dangerously close to acting like a cult or something.
Please face it: RP is dead wrong on this one (sorry dudes, nobody is infallible)
Here is a short video explaining the issue in 3min: http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/307
If your ISP provider tried this kind of shit, wouldn’t you say……..time to get a new ISP provider.
Didn’t AOL try this kind of “gatekeeping” and didn’t the public respond by throwing AOL in the trash heap?
Maybe we’re approching this the wrong way….Why don’t we see how Ted Stevens is gonna vote on this…and do the opposite.
@Steve - yeah, I know. The “market forces” will take care of everything. Except that they never did anything for any other media which always ended up in the hands of big money and monopolistic forces. Yeah, I know. It’s all the governments fault. Except that there will always be governments so rather than daydreaming about a perfect society in which there are no governments and in which market forces will take care of everything, I would submit that any freedom-loving realist would have to support net neutrality. You know why? Because that at least is in the realm of the possible while all the rest is plain delusional and only contributes to distract people from the struggles for freedom in the real world.
VS: I would add that the Internet was developed as a government-funded project, so trying to turn it into a full-blown free-market enterprise free of government restraints is trying to put the genie back in the bottle. As it stands, the Internet is a kind of happy and messy mix of government, corporate, and power-to-the-people interests all capable of being represented in equal measure.
The public policy angle of net neutrality is, as you say, a practical issue, the best option we have right now to keep the Internet content from becoming cable TV online, yet another example of the top-down media.
But VS, can you point me to the EFF statement supporting net neutrality? I must have missed that one. I thought they were . . . neutral.
I’m getting convinced….but you guys are missing the Trump Card….Apparently Ted Stevens is AGAINST net Neutrality….which means the correct position is to be for it….
…Ya can’t go around punching people in the face Major Asshole…but I wouldn’t put it past you
Well actually you can……..and I’ve had the Personal Injury Lawsuit filed against me (since settled) to prove it……..
Dang it, stevec ya don’t need no stinkin’ punches. Just turn yer moths on ‘em! The moths are all powerful and resistance is futile. Plus I’d like to see the bastards try to sue the moths…
Any chance of the mp3 being put up?
I missed the show.
SteveC: I didn’t miss the punch line.
Ted Stevens is FAMOUS for the series of pipes line and opposing NN.
And the bridge. Don’t forget the bridge.
And the FBI raid. He’s famous for that, too.
I watched the Hannity vs Paul clip above and saw that Paul had 33% of the post-debate viewer votes. Did he “win” that in the end? And btw, Hannity has got to be the biggest meathead on the planet. . . but you guys knew that already, right?
>Hannity has got to be the biggest meathead on the planet. .
Yes. Insanity is such a meathead that he can actually be pretty funny when he isn’t trying to be. Insanity is just an old frat boy. Insanity and CombOver. What a combo.
Hey VS, did you catch this?
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/09/06/is-bush-staging-nukes-for-iran/
@Tom S: well, after looking at the EFF site for something official I only found something not official at all: a bunch of links on this page: https://www.eff.org/cgi/mt/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=11&search=net+neutrality
But that really does not prove much I suppose. I was probably influenced by the fact that Lawrence Lessig is on the EFF Board and I don’t think that he would be on a board of an anti-net neutrality foundation. But maybe you are right and that they are officially neutral.
What do you know about that? Can you confirm their neutrality on net neutrality?
Hey Scott, little Catie Carrot, er I mean Catie Couric is “reporting” from Iraq this week. I think you mentioned something about her this week or was it last? Anyway, the Amerikan media…it’s just sad.
@Bob Bogus - yes, I did see that report and I don’t know yet what to make of it. I don’t see any reasons to get these weapons in this plane over the USA. It would be just as easy to use cargo planes to get the weapons to, say, Diego Garcia or any other B-52 base and then load them there. Also, I doubt that the USA will go nuclear against Iran. Not during missile/air strikes phase at least. Now, if the Iranians retaliate all bets are off the table, in particular if Iran directly attacks US forces in retaliation. Still, there are no good nuclear targets in Iran as far as I know (unless one assumes a totally FUBARed administration willing to strike with nukes inside highly populated areas. I mean, I just can’t believe these guys would be so totally crazy. But maybe I should?
Also, keep in mind that there are already plenty of nukes locally in the Middle-East on various ships, submarines and probably bases. The US has a long standing policy of neither deny nor confirm the presence of such weapons at any one location, but we have to assume that they are there. Shipping them from Minot Air Base in North Dakota (that is where the B-52s were from) just does not make much sense.
OK, I’ll answer my own question: Yes, Paul “won” the post debate poll with 33% of the vote. Read what they’re saying about it in Nashville:
http://www.nashvilleistalking.com/2007/09/05/fox-news-republican-debate-poll-ron-paul-wins-by-a-landslide/
(But I suspect you guys knew this already).
Apologies if this has been noted already, but it looks like RP smashed everyone else in the Maryland straw poll yesterday. This from the MD Repub party:
Congressman Ron Paul came in first place with 263 votes, Mayor Rudy Giuliani was second with 220 votes, and Senator Fred Thompson received 188 votes, which garnered the third place spot. The rest of the votes were cast as follows: 89 votes for Governor Mitt Romney, 54 votes for Senator John McCain, 35 votes for Governor Mike Huckabee, 17 votes for Speaker Newt Gingrich (write-in), 16 votes for Congressman Tom Tancredo, 12 votes for Senator Sam Brownback, 3 votes for Congressman Duncan Hunter, and 3 votes for Governor Bob Ehrlich (write-in). There were 11 other write-in votes for individual people. There were also a number of spoiled ballots that were not counted.
More here:
http://www.mdgop.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=5992
“Shipping them from Minot Air Base in North Dakota (that is where the B-52s were from) just does not make much sense.”
People who move em around all the time might mention a typical snafu in order to draw attention to nukes in context of the times…
It’s speculation, but interesting…
“…Nuclear Weapons aren’t off the table” …I wonder just what in the fuck goes on in their warped minds? It’d be interesting to have a look at their Psychiatric records, a la Daniel Ellsberg.
@Mace Price - yes, indeed, in particular in Baby-Bush’s head. I remember seeing some book about that, but I don’t remember the title. Something like “Dubya on the couch” or something
[...] The Show [...]
vin & Mace: there are a few on flubya’s mentality but he’s really no different than all authoritarians.
VS: If you’re still looking for at this thread, here you go.
From an email I got from Craig Aaron last summer at FreePress (who is behind “Save the Internet,” whose raison d’etre is Net Neutrality) when I was working on a book on Internet media:
“in the Net Neutrality section in the last chapter you list SavetheInternet.com (and
thanks for that) but also the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). EFF
does some great work … but they haven’t (unfortunately) taken a clear
stance on Net Neutrality, as is implied in your summary.”
After receiving that complaint I reworded the section to make it clear that we were not implying EFF was foursquare behind retaining Net Neutrality. I did the same EFF search you did to confirm what Aaron said, but I did not contact EFF directly about it, which would be the next step toward absolute confirmation, I suppose. For me at the time it wasn’t going to change my content–I stuck with discussing EFF as a defender of Internet privacy and free speech.
Since then, I haven’t seen any clearcut evidence on EFF’s site or anywhere else that they have an official stance on NN. I think they see it as outside their purview (and there might not be a consensus opinion on it).