Come on. Was this really some kind of actual question?

Ed Crane, the longtime president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said he met Paul for lunch during this period, and the two men discussed direct-mail solicitations, which Paul was sending out to interest people in his newsletters. They agreed that “people who have extreme views” are more likely than others to respond.

Crane said Paul reported getting his best response when he used a mailing list from the now-defunct newspaper Spotlight, which was widely considered anti-Semitic and racist.

Benton, Paul’s spokesman, said that Crane’s account “sounds odd” and that Paul did not recall the conversation.

At the time, Paul’s investment letter was languishing. According to the person involved with his businesses, Paul and others hit upon a solution: to “morph” the content to capi­tal­ize on a growing fear among some on the political right about the nation’s changing demographics and threats to economic liberty.

The investment letter became the Ron Paul Survival Report — a name designed to intrigue readers, the company secretary said. It cost subscribers about $100 a year. The tone of that and other Paul publications changed, becoming increasingly controversial. In 1992, for example, the Ron Paul Political Report defended chess champion Bobby Fischer, who became known as an anti-Semitic Holocaust denier, for his stance on “Jewish questions.’’

...

“The real big money came from some of that racially tinged stuff, but he also had to keep his libertarian supporters, and they weren’t at all comfortable with that,’’ he said.

In related news, a pitch for some new book on the essential truthiness of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was discovered on Paul's Campaign for Liberty website. It's now been zapped without explanation, though the screenshot remains.

I'm sure Paul didn't know about that and didn't solicit that. And no, I'm not being sarcastic. But after Ron Paul sending the message for 20 years that Neo-Nazis were welcome in his libertarian club, Neo-Nazis strangely derived from that the belief that they are welcome in his libertarian club.

Posted by: Ace at 07:46 AM | Comments (52)
Post contains 358 words, total size 3 kb.

This is the Plinkett guy and a confederate, though he doesn't play Plinkett. (Oddly, when Plinkett appears in these, he's played by someone else.)

The argument is between "forgettable bad movie" (Plinkett's confederate) and "trainwreck" (Plinkett).

It turns out the opening scene doesn't have the white pilots behaving cowardly in running away from German fighters. Instead, they were behaving retardedly. Apparently the Germans keep running a game on them where they engage, then fly away, and the white fighter pilots chase them... leaving the bombers defenseless against the real German fighter offensive, which now comes, and wipes out the convoy.

Apparently the order "Yeah, don't do that anymore" doesn't work with the white fighter pilots, which is the reason they have to bring in the black pilots.

That's... dumb.
more...

Posted by: Ace at 07:09 AM | Comments (163)
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.

He says he wants the second term "badly" because the American people really need it.

Diane Sawyer then essentially calls him a hero ("bold") for ordering Seal Team Six into action.

Only a Democrat's military successes count.

Sawyer's toughest question for Obama is, seriously: Why are you only talking about your economic successes now? Why did it take you three years to talk up the great things you've done for the economy? That's a paraphrase, but that is her big tough question for Obama. (At 3:00.)

Oh by the way, that question was submitted by "partners" at Yahoo. Diane Sawyer's taking questions from other people, but it seems only questions about why Obama's taken so long to tout his accomplishments.

She then hits him with a hard-hitting question: Does your family now have the clip of you singing Al Green as their ringtone?

And the devastating follow-up: If you lose the presidency, will your little daughter Sasha be sad?

No, that's not a joke. She asks that.

ABC brands the interview "candid." more...

Posted by: Ace at 06:54 AM | Comments (153)
Post contains 215 words, total size 3 kb.

Friday!

Just a day after denying reports that he was considering folding up and leaving Florida before the primary, Rick Santorum is folding up and leaving Florida before the primary. Says he'd rather do his taxes.

Survivors of the Costa Concordia will be given lump-sump compensation payments of about $14,400, I assume in exchange for signing a liability release.

NYTimes: actually, Romney paid more in taxes than he owed. Oops.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:51 AM | Comments (500)
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

So Who Do You Trust?

At least profession-wise as measured by a recent Gallup poll.

Well for damn sure not Congress.

In fact the 7% "very high trust" number for members of Congress is actually the lowest number ever recorded since the polling began in 1976. But of course when people answer this question what they really mean is how much do I trust members of Congress except my own representatives whom I love and insist on re-electing 94% of the time.

And high school teachers - and teachers in general - seem to get undue respect and trust IMO. Not that they shouldn't get *any* - but higher than policemen and clergy? Really?

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:02 PM | Comments (708)
Post contains 672 words, total size 6 kb.

CNN. 8pm Eastern.

I wish I could say I was excited about another debate, but I've seen enough of these to last a lifetime.

To overcome the lack of enthusiasm, even the extreme ennui shown by *ahem* certain parties, we're going to mix it up a little tonight. more...

Posted by: andy at 03:50 PM | Comments (699)
Post contains 210 words, total size 2 kb.

I've got to knock off for the day, at least for a few hours. I was up late last night attacking the troll ergie/Raykon/GayLord and I've got migraines from being on the computer so much the past couple of days.

I don't think there's going to be a liveblog tonight, but who knows. Andy seems determined. He's just crazy enough to do it alone.

[Update - Andy] It's on like Donkey Kong! Or Donkey punch. Whichever.

Posted by: Ace at 12:51 PM | Comments (579)
Post contains 79 words, total size 1 kb.

Hoo-boy, sure has been a lot of anti-Newt coverage lately. It has made some strange allies of people like ABC reporters and Matt Drudge, for example. Of course, there's a risk with all the over-the-top coverage. I don't think people like it very much. It's going to end-up helping Gingrich, just like the nasty ex-wife coverage did last week.

Backlash Frankenstein

Way to go guys. You're pissing people off and galvanizing support for Newt. I said during the last debate liveblog his opponents need to be careful: "That's not a layer of fat; that's 'corbomite.'" That's nerd-fu for a substance that blows up in your face when you try to attack.

Jonah Goldberg said in his Newtzilla piece a couple of days ago:

Six weeks ago, during the last Newt Gingrich surge, I wrote here that “conventional weapons are useless against Newtzilla. . . . Everything bad about Gingrich — the flip-flops, the wives, the ego — is known. Once voters have convinced themselves they can overlook that stuff, it’s hard to change their minds simply by repeating it.”

In fact, repeating it makes him stronger. For many people, anyway.

Below is video linked at HotAir of a nice speech by Newt where points out that Mitt Romney isn't as smart has he thinks. "And we aren't that stupid." more...

Posted by: rdbrewer at 12:08 PM | Comments (366)
Post contains 321 words, total size 3 kb.

I was just saying this. You know the problem with homsexuality?

It's underexposed. We need to talk about it some more.

I need to be further familiarized with a subculture celebrated by about 40% of 1% of the population.

MADONNA is “bringing gay to the Super Bowl.” That’s what we overheard one of her dancers say at the premiere party for Her Madgesty’s “W.E.” at Top of the Standard on Monday night. On the red carpet, Madonna told us she’s “extremely nervous” about the big game, but looking forward to singing her new song, Smells Like Pleather.

I made that song title up.

No but I'm glad she'll be there. The Super Bowl has been very stodgy of late, with lots of very old acts appealing primarily to the over-45 set.

Madonna will bring a fresh, youthful breeze of novelty and vitality to the game.

Below, a walk-through of "Her Madgesty's" performance. more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:43 AM | Comments (192)
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

I'll let you read the article.

Now you'd think the guys announcing this decision must be pretty smart. I mean, if you're going to lay down this kind of smack, you'd better be buttoned-up and squared away as far as your own brainpower.

Right?

Except while reading this I came across this--

Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.

Obviously any ideology is an attempt to deal with complexity and unknowns -- ideology provides a rough guess or rule of thumb in new situations.

And obviously the leftwing has all sorts of simplistic bromides precisely like this.

Did they test to see how leftwing dummies might cling to simplistic pablum?

Nope!

But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.

"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."

Speculation.

Let's not bother testing that. Let's get out the door with the conclusion that rightwingers are dummies.

Oh, and, by the way: Let's define "conservative beliefs" as "racism" and "support for near-fascism."

Because you know all those freedom loving liberals would never, ever support a government that intrudes into people's personal choices and dictates the legally-permissible choices.

via @allahpundit

Posted by: Ace at 11:19 AM | Comments (223)
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.