The 2012 Race Gets Real

Eight losers in search of the blessing from a winner's widow.

Tonight’s the night we get past the preliminaries and the 2012 presidential election really gets started.   All across the state of Iowa, the predominantly White, conservative evangelical populace will dutifully drag themselves into auditoriums, classrooms, living rooms and anywhere else they can congregate to caucus and make the case for their favorite Republican.

If the polls mean anything, Mitt Romney will come out on top by edging out Ron Paul and the recently returned to political relevance, Rick Santorum.  Newt Gingrich had his fling with Iowa, but he’s admitted he won win and with Romney likely to take New Hampshire as well, Gingrich along with Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann will take their show on the road to South Carolina and Florida in search of somewhere to plant their flag and slow Romney’s roll to the nomination.

No, I didn’t forget Jon Huntsman, but everyone else has.  If he doesn’t show well in New Hampshire it’s hard to envision where he could win.  Ditto for Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich and Santorum.  They don’t have Mitt’s organization, endorsements or deep pockets.

That leaves Paul who says he has no intentions of running as an independent, but hasn’t said he won’t either.   If he does, Paul would draw some votes from President Obama, but would be more of a help to him than Romney.   If Fox News and the conservative establishment keep saying mean things about him and Mitt doesn’t incorporate any of Paul’s messages into his campaign, I predict Paul will run a guerilla campaign against Obama and Romney, but he’s more likely to hurt the GOP nominee.

One last thing about Paul.  When I wrote two consecutive posts about his racist newsletters and refusal to sufficiently distance himself from them,  I knew the Paulinistas would be pissed.  I had hoped they might offer some sort of intelligent defense of their boy.   That hasn’t happened.

if thats all you can come up with to complain about ron paul then you should find new material to waste your time on, if you think he’s such a bad guy what do you think about these real fuck holes that manipulate your views and form your opinions for you, if you knew anything you would know ron paul isn’t a racist and you are more the racist for portraying that kind of material on your blog, be a little more realistic when reporting on real people.

It wasn’t his newsletter, it was a newsletter that he leant his name to. He was not involved in the production of the newsletter. Since the incident he has stopped lending his name out in such a manner. Ron Paul is a prolific writer who tends to reiterate his beliefs over and over again in his writings. He had never written anything like the newsletter before the newsletter, nor has he since. Therefore, there is no reason to not believe him. He didn’t write it. Period. Let it go.

Ron Paul supported desegregation of government institutions but was against imposing the same laws on private businesses because doing so would increase government power. And because both parts are in the civil rights act, he would have voted against it. This does not make him a racist. It makes him an idealist who sticks to his priciples and applies them accross the board no matter how unpopular. And no he does not want to repeal the Civil Rights Act, as that would be a collosal wast of time. The first thing he would do is end the Bush/Obama wars.

Why not list some of the recent civil rights legislation that Paul voted no on. I can garuntee that he did so because they increased government power.

Yes Paul voted against giving a congressional metal of honor to Rosa Parks. He votes against ALL congressional metals of honor including one for Mother Teresa. Why? Because he does not believe that congress has the authority spend the People’s money without the consent of the People. He did however offer to put up $100 of his own money for Rosa Park’s metal, and asked the other members of congress to do so also. They all declined.

Oh, and I’m Black and I support Ron Paul.

You have my sympathies, but being Black and a Ron Paul supporter is your problem.  You have the right to be wrong.

Ron Paul is not a racist. He’s just opposed to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, published, but never read the racist essays run in his own newsletters, and is “clueless” to Black and Latino culture and particularly of Mexican-Americans and “intolerant” of anyone speaking Spanish in his presence.

Adios, puta madre.

Ron Paul is not anti-Semitic. He just yelled at a group of Republican Jews until they walked out and thinks saving the Jews from Hitler’s Final Solution in WWII was a bad idea.

Ron Paul is not homophobic. He just doesn’t want to shake a gay man’s hand or use the same toilet a gay man uses and prefers to hold it until he can find a nice, clean public toilet in a restaurant where he can take a dump.

Ron Paul was a doctor. He obviously is fearful of getting gay cooties.

It’s a terrible thing to believe in someone who isn’t everything they present themselves are, but I don’t care if I haven’t convinced the Paulinistas their messiah is a bigot.  I’m convinced.  You’re on your own.

Maybe you’re not mistaken.  Maybe Ron Paul is your hope for a president you can believe in.

But if you’re not Black, possibly not gay, probably not in need of an abortion or of the Jewish faith, by all means, cast your fate to a bigoted wind.

Whatever happens in Iowa tonight will not produce the key moment in the 2012 race that totally altered it.  When Obama beat Hillary Clinton in 2008, it was a huge upset, but Clinton blunted Obama’s bounce by winning New Hampshire a week later.  Romney is the prohibitive front-runner and until someone emerges as the Anti-Romney, he’s still the most likely Republican to take on Obama.

Before we get to the main event we still have to suffer through the qualifying preliminaries.