Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates

[bishop]

foxcarolina.com - News, Weather, Video - Greenville, Spartanburg, Asheville, Anderson | Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates

Associated Press - May 16, 2007 8:25 PM ET The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party today says that he will try to bar presidential candidate Ron Paul from future GOP debates. Michigan party chairman Saul Anuzis says remarks Paul made suggested that the September Eleventh attacks were the fault of US foreign policy. Anuzis says he will circulate a petition among Republican National Committee members to ban Paul from more debates. At last night's GOP debate, Paul drew attacks from all sides when he linked the terror attacks to US bombings in Iraq. Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

great country we live in... freedom and liberty and all that stuff.. :rolleyes:

[PatrickHenry]

I think his statement was a major campaign error.

That type of allegation needs to be very carefully phrased.

Reckless...

[Duke1985]

I could see why that party wouldn't want Paul to be the face of their party, this isn't really freedom issue as it is GOP internal politics issue, they only want to bar him from GOP debates.

Sucks for Paul, but what are you gonna do?

[The Decider]

Quote by: PatrickHenry I think his statement was a major campaign error. That type of allegation needs to be very carefully phrased. Reckless...

I agree. The conservative radio talk shows are having a field day with Paul's 911 comments and praising Guiliani. Two days ago those same shows condemned Guiliani for his pro-choice views. The gaffe will make it easier for Republicans like this leader in Michigan to call for Paul's exclusion.

I hope Paul continues to participate in the debates, and I'm sure Guiliani does too. I expect Guiliani to again ask Paul to retract his comment. Paul will refuse, of course, which will allow the mayor to rant about 911 yet again. Paul is best when he focuses on the Iraq War, the achilles heel of the Republican Party.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Ron Paul was spot on. If it wasnt entirely an inside job, then yeah, it had to be our foreign policy.

So the repugnants are still waiting for the Middle East to deliver flowers and candy?


They dont hate us for our freedoms, and because our women dont wear burkas. They hate that we murder their children and steal their oil.

They hate our bombing raids on innocent populations.
And our infidel troops in their Holy Land.

[fushigi]

I'm proud of Paul for sticking to his principles. He came up with some pretty clever arguments, too:

Paul offered perhaps the most unusual twist in the discussion, citing President Reagan's decision to pull U.S. troops out of Lebanon after a terrorist bombing. "Reagan addressed this subject in his memoirs. And he says, 'I said I would never turn tail and run…. But I never realized the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics,' and he changed his policy there. We need the courage of a Ronald Reagan."

This might actually turn out good for Paul--get him some exposure and get more people talking about him. This isn't the end for him, not by a long stretch.

[Autolykos]

Quote by: PatrickHenry I think his statement was a major campaign error. That type of allegation needs to be very carefully phrased. Reckless...

Why was it an error?

Obviously Dr. Paul's campaign is not so much about getting elected as it is about speaking truth to power. What better way to do that than to reveal a hidden truth about that most sensitive subject of our day -- 9/11?

- Rob

[gr8fuldaniel]

Who should be banned from GOP debates?
Guiliani... for KNOWINGLY providing the wrong kind of radios to first responders, causing hundreds of deaths of the best and bravest NYers on 911.
And...
Mitt Romney... hes a native born mexican. Not qualified for the presidency. Oh yeah, and his creepy religion .

[gr8fuldaniel]

How Rudy got it wrong:

Rudy Giuliani v. Ron Paul, and Reality <snip> But congressman did not back down, and for good reason. Unlike Giuliani, the Texan has actually read the record. The 9-11 Commission report detailed how bin Laden had, in 1996, issued "his self-styled fatwa calling on Muslims to drive American soldiers out of Saudi Arabia" and identified that declaration and another in 1998 as part of "a long series" of statements objecting to U.S. military interventions in his native Saudi Arabia in particular and the Middle East in general. Statements from bin Laden and those associated with him prior to 9-11 consistently expressed anger with the U.S. military presence on the Arabian Peninsula, U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people and U.S. support of Israel. The 9-11 Commission based its assessments on testimony from experts on terrorism and the Middle East. Asked about the motivations of the terrorists, FBI Special Agent James Fitzgerald told the commission: "I believe they feel a sense of outrage against the United States. They identify with the Palestinian problem, they identify with people who oppose repressive regimes, and I believe they tend to focus their anger on the United States." Fitzgerald's was not a lonely voice in the intelligence community. Michael Scheuer, the former Central Intelligence Agency specialist on bin Laden and al-Qaeda, has objected to simplistic suggestions by President Bush and others that terrorists are motivated by an ill-defined irrational hatred of the United States. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people," Scheuer said in a CNN interview. "We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." more...

Ron Paul invites a debate with rudy in the last line of this article:

No wonder then that, when asked about his dust-up with Giuliani, Paul said he'd be "delighted" to debate the front-runner on foreign policy.

Do you think Rudy is brave enough to accept? The truth is on Pauls side

[brien]

The GOP wants to get rid of the "crazy uncle" in the room. They are seeking to marginalize Paul because he is speaking the truth without the spin. If I were Paul, I would carry a copy of the 911 Commission Report and hand it to Rudy during the next debate and ask him to read it so he could actually know what is commonly accepted as the causes of 911. The press would have a field day with the gesture and it would clear up the negative spin the media has put on Paul's SC remarks.

It is typical of the GOP to attempt to sweep the truth under the rug of disinformation.

[brien]

Do you think Rudy is brave enough to accept? The truth is on Pauls side

No I think Rudy's tactics will be to continue his spin appeal to "Patriotism" based upon the negative spin he and the media is using on Paul now. Rudy has nothing to gain and everything to lose so he would be a fool to accept the challange. He already has the propulsion he needed from the negative spin on Paul's comment. Why bother with the truth?

[Osborn F Enready]

I will be writing the Ohio and Michigan Republican Party to state my views on this. Michigan is probably taking that stance because they have so much invested in the lies, especially with Detroit taking such huge financial hits in the production jobs and factory jobs. I think the Republican Party in Michigan is having trouble admitting to their local constituents just how much the Bush policies have hurt them, and they are trying to save face with a group of scarecrow, hard-core Bush supporters by damning Paul. Ohio has a lot of the same going on right now also, except that the Libertarian movement is much stronger in Ohio, especially around Columbus, which is where Ohio Law is crafted.

I urge all Paul supporters to write the Michigan Republican Party and condemn them for attempting to eliminate truth from debate, based on their "anti-Paul" attitude.

[bishop]

contacting the michigan officials is definitely good.

there's also an online petition.

Ron Paul RNC Participation Petition Petition

[GHook93]

Quote by: bishop foxcarolina.com - News, Weather, Video - Greenville, Spartanburg, Asheville, Anderson | Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates great country we live in... freedom and liberty and all that stuff.. :rolleyes:

They are not barring him from running for President, but they are barring him from representing their party and they have all the power to do that.

[GHook93]

Quote by: PatrickHenry I think his statement was a major campaign error. That type of allegation needs to be very carefully phrased. Reckless...

It would have been more reckless of Paul to state baseless propaganda that Bush, US Government, the Mayor and/or the Israelis were responsible. :rolleyes: Although that would have made some great drama.

His current asseration was totally out of line, but won't win him any primaries.

[GHook93]

Quote by: fushigi I'm proud of Paul for sticking to his principles. He came up with some pretty clever arguments, too:This might actually turn out good for Paul--get him some exposure and get more people talking about him. This isn't the end for him, not by a long stretch.

It is the end for him receiving the Republican Ticket. Best he could do is run on the Libertarian ticket, take some votes from the Republicans and finish in a very distant 3rd in the generals.

[Osborn F Enready]

Ghook, Ron Paul was right when he stated we were attacked because of blowback from foreign policy interventionism. Read Osama Bin Laden's declaration of war against the U.S. in 1996 and it states exactly the same thing that Ron Paul said as the reason we were attacked. Paul is factually correct 100%, according to the 9-11 Commission, Osamas written testament of claim for 9-11, and all the prevailing intelligence, facts.

Read it at: BIN LADEN'S FATWA (Why Ron Paul was Factually Correct) (UBL cited Iraq in 1996 Declaration of War)

So, do you think Republicans are upset with Paul because he is telling the truth, thereby not representing the party, or because his "other politics" don't support the party ideals?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: GHook93 It is the ende for him receiving the Republican Ticket. Best he could do is run on the Libertarian ticket, take some votes from the Republicans and finish in a very distant 3rd in the generals.

Wow, I'm glad we're all looking to you for your vast insight, and political advice. We'll be sure to forward this far thinking advice right to his campaign managers.


My guess would have been that the mere mention of truth, or ( gasp ) a common sense approach would hurt all the other candidates because they're all complicit the same crimes against the people.

[rcne]

Have any of you ever considered the proverbial "third rail" that Ron Paul grabbed.
I read the MI GOP statement and they can ban him from further debates.
Candidates have seen their political careers shot down for a much less grievous statement.
Following the loony left with their conspiracy theories will not win the GOP nomination.
I was all for his right to be listed and included on the platform but if this is the kind of statement he wishes to base his candidacy on, he has a problem with the GOP middle ground.
This may be a time to form a real third party and Ron Paul can be a major force behind it.
As a GOP candidate, he doesn't have a chance.

[Osborn F Enready]

Looks like the people of the nation support him a lot more than the puny republican base then, as all the polls show him far in the lead of the others when he is included in the poll.