The Webster Tarpley audio that someone is so proud of and finds so convincing:
It actually kind of blew me away to hear this. And it’s actually kind of funny to realize someone finds this mumbler and his drivel convincing. I honestly thought there was going to be something of substance…something even warranting any amount of thought or consideration or…something. “A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Romney”. Oh. Wow. Interesting. Tell me more. “Well you see there’s a deal in place. See you’re a Ron Paul supporter, so you don’t get this because you’re more obtuse than an Obama supporter. But watch the debates. Ron Paul never attacks Romney. They’re in cahoots. That’s how I know. I mean, I’m a genius, so you know. But you know what, dear friend, you don’t even have to be a genius like I am. Just watch the debates with your eyes open. He doesn’t attack Romney. Ergo, Ron Paul is working for Romney. Ron Paul attacks the frontrunner of the anti-Romney vote. He’s obviously not trying to get that vote for himself. He’s just running interference for Romney.”
And definitely listen after that part ,starting at 17:51…he claims that the (sham) anti-Romney/Bain film (which was proven to be full of lies and outright distortions) showed how Romney was a hyena and “guess who came out to defend him…Ron Paul!”
First of all, the film was such a sham that even individuals interviewed in the film went on national television to state that their comments were taken out of context to a point at which the subject matter their audio was used to lend support to, wasn’t even what they were talking about when they made the statements. The Washington Post pointed out plenty of fallacies and gave the film “four Pinocchios”.
Gingrich himself ended up having to make a public statement to the PAC that was airing the film, telling them to “either edit every single mistake or pull the entire film.”
But of course, Tarpley not only goes on as if the film were accurate, he goes a step farther (of course because it’s the only way he can support his narrative) saying that:
“Ron Paul came out…saying 'if you don’t like creative destruction, if you don’t agree that everybody should be fired and companies should be destroyed and shut down, and Romney should walk away with huge bonuses and golden parachute, and you know, ill-gotten gains and he shouldn’t pay any taxes on it because it’s all capital gains and carried interest…then you’re all anti-capitalist.”
Obviously Ron Paul said nothing of the kind. (Even if you concede this as hyperbole, Ron Paul still said nothing of the kind.) This is a gross distortion and mischaracterization of anything Ron Paul ever said. [1] [2] [3] (But of course, again, he has nothing else to point to to create his narrative, so, ya know.)
He claims Paul and Romney refused to attend the scheduled debate in Georgia, thus basically cancelling it, and that this is more evidence of them being on the same team. He (somehow) conveniently forgets to mention that Rick Santorum (remember him?)…the only other main contendor in the race also declined (the same day as Romney and Paul)…leaving Gingrich as the only one who wanted that debate. And Tarpley himself claims that Gingrich is basically the best debator, and of course he neglects to mention the significance of Georgia being Gingrich’s home state. Gee. I wonder why none of the other candidates cared to attend that debate. It’s because they’re all in cahoots with Romney, and Gingrich was his main threat. That’s why. I mean it’s so blatently obvious.
His next piece of “evidence” is the fact that Endorse Liberty (the SuperPAC that originally ran a bunch of pro-Ron Paul stuff) is based in (Mormon town) Salt Lake City. Because, obviously a SuperPAC endorsing Ron Paul would obviously have it’s headquarters in Galveston or some place like that. (This is what Tarpley said.) Right. An organization which by law cannot have any sort of cooperation with the campaign is going to locate its headquarters right in Ron Paul’s tiny Congressional district, on an island, on the coast of Texas. For no fucking reason. So the fact that they didn’t do that and instead headquartered it in Mormon Mecca Utah, that means Paul and Romney are in cahoots. When Paul had absolutely nothing to do with that SuperPAC and was legally prohibited from even communicating with them.
This idiot doesn’t even seem to understand what a SuperPAC is or how it works. He keeps calling it “Ron Paul’s superpac” and claims Peter Thiel donated millions of dollars to the Ron Paul campaign.
This guy is like the left-wing version of Dick “the dick” Morris. Direct quote:
“Suppose you’re for peace. […] Are there good reasons to vote against Ron Paul? Yes there are! Suppose I don’t want to die when Ron Paul cuts two-thirds out of my food stamps. Suppose I don’t want to die when Ron Paul destroys Social Security. […] and similarly for unemployment benefits, for Head Start, for all the other things that he either wants to destroy or cut or thinks is unconstitutional…this barbaric program of genocide against the American people! How many hundreds of thousands, millions of dead Americans do we have to have so that Ron Paul can act out his fidelities for this faulty[?] Austrian School? Isn’t that a good reason to vote against him? I think it is. You don’t want to die. There’s a good reason.”
He goes on to describe how Ron Paul has his “own version of the New World Order”. He quotes/paraphrases from a speech Ron Paul made on the Congressional floor in which he said “we have nothing to fear from globalism, a single world currency, and from free trade.” Now, Tarpley himself admits Paul was talking about and probably meant to say “globalization”, and he also states that by “single world currency” Paul was talking about gold. But Tarpley says these things and the host of the broadcast says “oh my. There it is, folks. Goodbye.”
Tarpley says what Ron Paul is saying is that he has an alternative cheaper path to a universal empire and the New World Order. He says Ron Paul is saying “I don’t need war”, because
“once you have a single gold currency that no government can control, (except it would be controlled by, you know the City of London Bank, who traditionally have control of it), uh…if if you have free trade, that that means no government can influence any commodity flows or have any, you know, dirigistic mercantilist or protectionist policies—and then of course globalism, what he means by that I think he means more like globalization but he says globalism…globalization or globalism meaning what…uh deregulation, privatization, union busting, no estate tax, a race to the bottom, no social welfare, no safety net, and so forth…that of course is the recipe for…that is the end point of the enemy’s New World Order. […] Ron Paul’s disagreement is basically over means, not ends.”
So of course, deregulation, privatization…these are bad things, and dirigistic mercantilist policies are good things. Got it. Thanks Webster Tarpley.
And here’s a few more gems:
“[Ron Paul] says if you have private property, private property trumps anybody’s right to be served…private property rights trump human rights. No. I’m sorry. And we do…Ron Paul says ‘you have no right to medical care’. Yes we do! We’re Americans and we have economic rights. And I don’t care what the Austrian School says.” […]
“A vehicle for peace, keep it clean, keep it single issue if you must, but don’t add in the destruction of the social safety net, the hatred of the New Deal, that you’re going to strip everybody of their economic rights, that’ you’re going to take down two-thirds of food stamp budget, that you’re going to rape Mediaid and SCHIP and Head Start, and all this…you know but this entire, you know, Austrian School ideological baggage, that’s a loser!”
“[Ron Paul] is a doctrinaire follower of this alien, poisonous, foreign ideology, the Austrian School, which has no roots in American history whatsoever. It’s as far as communism or anything else you want to name. It’s utterly alien. It’s not in the Constitution, it’s not in the Declaration of Independence, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln, were not followers of the Austrian School, uh, and so forth.”
“Ron Paul, Rand Paul support the National Right to Work law, which would destroy all unions in the United States. There is no greater step toward totalitarian dictatorship than the destruction of all unions.”
“This is the irony, is that Ron Paul says he doesn’t want totalitarianism, but ironically everything he does brings it closer.”
This is the guy Aristophanes is getting his stuff from. This is the guy that he “trust[s] on almost everything he says”. Which actually explains a lot. Thanks for sharing that, Phany.
As for Tarpley, I’m actually dumbfounded. I’d actually never heard anything from this guy before, but I was interested because I had heard a few good things here and there about how he had some good insight on the war or on this or that. But jeezus. This is the guy? Is there some other “Webster Tarpley” people could have been talking about? This is the caliber of intellectual thought that passes for praise these days?
Good god.
P.S.
If anyone disagrees with anything Ron Paul said “in defense” of Romney, and/or agrees with Tarpley’s assessment of that situation (or his apparent feelings on the dealings of Bain and the content of that King of Bain film), I’d love to hear about it.