Appearing on a lot of sites now that Rand Paul has endorsed Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum has announced he's going to take on the Ron Paul supporters at the convention, and Dr. Paul himself has said he won't be the nominee:
In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
Comments
I know 2 more places it will be appearing.
I noticed that, and I even thought about editing it.
But then I thought: enthusiasm for the Big Johnson should always be rewarded rather than graded.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/526079_10100594803126674_1486359406_n.jpg
Problem is the "Gary" part. I had to think about the joke for a second. Good attempt, but good humor is supposed to be quick to understand.
I will spot you that. I don't think it is perfect by any means, and my chief reasons for running it were two-fold.
1. There is a local blogger friend of mine named kavips who pointed out (including a school board election) that I always tended to support candidates named "Johnson" and go in for them in a big way. I just wanted him to see somebody had the same thought.
2. On the other hand, there is going to be--no matter what Mitt Romney and Rand Paul do--a large segment of disillusioned Ron Paul supporters who do not support the ticket. My rough demographic breakdown suggests that most of those folks will NOT be in battleground states. In the grand scheme of things they are a few percentage points here or there, but of course to the GJ campaign trying to get to 15% those points are important. My idea, frankly, is that the Gary Johnson folks have been too deferential to them thus far, and need to take a more provocative line. This suited my purpose for that.
But it doesn't matter, life is always great when you emit a giant guffaw... :) Still smiling too....
Yes, you'll pick up their enthusiasm and money. But you will lose a number of supporters in the process.
Many pro-defense libertarians support Gary PRECISELY because he isn't Ron Paul. He's not a whacko on foreign policy. Yes, he's generally non-interventionist, but he's a reasonable non-interventionist willing to consider the views of pro-defensers.
You throw some rabidly Hate America First Ron Paulists into that mix, and you'll run off the few pro-defensers Gary Johnson has in his camp.
Meaning that if he's himself,those who agree or see him as the best alternative, will flock ... to him..
Coming soon, will be the attempt to paint him as a "whacky"... He needs to be careful of what he says right now, to prevent that. Not get caught up in the heat of the moment.
Example:
Not too many Delawareans think Pete Du Pont as a whacky, but that is exactly how he came across in the 88 primary, simply because he brought up an option of allowing people to privatize a portion of their Social Security to achieve a higher rate of return. Bush HW, teased him about his first name Pete, "Pete, is that short for Peter?" , then said, "I don't think we want to play around with Social Security"
Dupont dropped out. Couldn't go on. He was tagged.
IF Gary can survive the first plastering, so that he is in the debates, then he can provide his ideas with enough explanation making them acceptable, and not portrayed as some silly spouting by a third tier candidate.