Most GOP Military Donations for President Went to Ron Paul

While politicos fight about what the troops want, a majority of the money that members of the military donated to Republican candidates for President went to the most antiwar candidate: Ron Paul.

Analyzing the latest finance reports, The Spin Factor broke down the donations from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and among Veterans (their figures do not include the Marines, which only slightly alters the results).

Name

Total

Army

Navy

AF

Vets
Paul
23,465
6,975
6,765
4,650
5,075
McCain
15,825
6,925
6,305
1,795
800
Romney
3,551
2,051
0
1,500
0
Giuliani
2,320
1,450
370
250
250
Hunter
1,000
0
1,000
0
Huckabee
750
250
0
500
Tancredo
350
350
0
0
Brownback
71
71
0
0
Thompson
0
0
0
0

*Note: The numbers for the last five candidates have not been thoroughly verified.

52.53%: Ron Paul
35.4%: McCain
7.9%: Romney
5.2%: Giuliani
2.2%: Hunter
2.6%: Others

Thanks to Iraq Slogger.

Too Bad They Can’t Duel (and Fire Simultaneously)

Christopher Hitchens disses Lord Black, though his bile, the product of a feud two decades ago, seems tempered by his gradual convergence with the Borg (“I remember running into a very conservative gentleman in the corridors of the American Enterprise Institute a year or so ago…”). In a nutshell, it’s Hitchens the aristocratic commie versus Black the make-believe aristocrat. Rather dull, actually, but we wouldn’t want you to miss an episode in the Great Neocon Crack-Up.

Foreign Lobbyists for Hillary

From an account (in The New Republic) of a Hillary for President rally in New Hampshire:

“One last footnote: The Clintons had no more enthusiastic cheerleaders than a small clutch of people who cheered them deliriously while mysteriously waving around a foreign flag. I was confused at first until I spotted the soccer jersey worn by a teenage boy in the group: BOSNIA- HERZEGOVINA, it read. These were clearly Bosnians forever grateful for the Clinton administration’s Balkan interventions–which had few stronger advocates than Hillary herself. Anyone know how many Bosnians are registered to vote in New Hampshire?”

The War Party takes care of its own.

I Get Letters: A Good Idea

A great letter from a reader:

“Upon reading your article, ‘The Politico’s Brazen Lies About Ron Paul‘, I came upon the idea that what the American political world needs is a website where us simpletons can keep track of who the bad guys are. I am not trying to be cute. I mean this in all sincerity.

“For example, the author of the above-mentioned piece could be listed as a traitor against human thought and freedom as well as a liar and shill for unseen powers. We could include a list of indictments against his character with links to online resources ‘proving’ the charges.”

What a great idea! A web site devoted to the exposure of human evil. And one that names names — excellent! The only problem with The Politico piece, however, is that the author chose to remain anonymous. Smear artists are such cowards.

UPDATE: Ooops! I must be going blind: the culprit’s name is at the bottom of The Politico’s blog post, and a reader sends in this bio:

Daniel W. Reilly, a staff writer, comes to Politico from the Washington Bureau of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Prior to that, he worked as a reporter for The Trinidad Guardian newspaper on the island of Trinidad and Tobago . He holds a B.A. from The University of Wisconsin and a M.A. from The George Washington University. He was a Fulbright Scholar on the island of Trinidad in 2003-04.”

Is there any way we can send this guy back to Trinidad and Tobago?

The Politico’s Brazen Lies About Ron Paul

The Republican smear machine is revving up its motors, getting ready to launch a typically vicious campaign against Ron Paul, the only real threat to their death-grip on the GOP. Since the first assault, a piece by Ryan Sager in the New York Sun, failed — the charges of “racism” were based on tenuous documentation and fall apart when examined up close — the second wave has been launched: a piece in The Politico, headlined: “Ron Paul Warns of Staged Terror Attack.” It links to a clip of a radio interview with Ron, conducted by Alex Jones, and hosted on the Breitbart.com site — part of the neocon-Drudge propaganda network.

If you listen to the interview, one thing is clear: Paul said no such thing. Jones asked him a 5-minute-long question that melded together all sorts of disparate elements, including the possibility of a staged US government-sponsored terrorist attack and a US military attack on Iran. Ron focused exclusively on the latter, and said that the great danger comes from a “Gulf of Tonkin“-type incident involving Iran. No mention is made by Paul of a staged terrorist attack on US soil.

Ron spends the rest of the interview talking about what a disaster an attack on Iran would turn out to be, and then launches into his favorite subject: the economic consequences of our spendthrift ways, and the impossibility of maintaining our empire of debt.

The Politico is telling a lie: their headline is a lie. What’s amazing about this particular smear is that it is so transparently obvious: after all, in this day and age, we don’t need intermediaries and “gate-keepers” telling us what Paul said, we can refer directly to it by linking to it. And anyone who listens to what Ron says in this interview cannot come away thinking that he said the US government is going to stage a terrorist attack on its own people on American soil or anywhere else.

The smears are starting to come, just as some people feared: but there is no reason to quake and quail. The lies of the neocons are so brazen, so easily debunked, and so obviously motivated by people with an agenda, that they will boomerang on the smear artists — and wind up helping Ron rather than hurting him. The voters will begin to ask: who is taking out all the stops in an effort to destroy the candidacy of a good and honest man? Who is trying to frame him up on phony charges — and why?

Ask those bozos over at The Politico: (202) 289-1155.

UPDATE: Here the “Prison Planet” web site run by Jones complains that readers are writing in saying that Paul never said the words Jones tries to put in his mouth. Jones then — again — conflates Paul’s contention that a “Gulf of Tonkin” incident on the Iran-Iraq border is a danger with the wacked-out idea that the US government is going to stage a real terrorist attack against its own citizens. Apparently they believe their own readers are sooooooo stupid that they won’t notice they’re being lied to. Ditto, The Politico ….