The talking heads (both TV and radio) are gleefully proclaiming the Ron Paul campaign officially dead after the Giuliani/Paul dust up last night. Below is a clip of the exchange.
The reaction from the internet has been interesting (I'll post my own reaction later):
Vox Popoli: "I note that Giuliani didn't stop the first 9/11. So I suggest that his opinion is the very last one that deserves to be consulted regarding how to stop the next one."
Andrew Sullivan writes "...the debate winnowed the field of candidates down to two: McCain and Paul. That was quick."
Ross Douthat, The Atlantic Online: "the attention that Paul's getting isn't, pace Andrew, a sign of the hidden strength of conservative opposition to Bush's Iraq policy - it's a sign of its weakness, and the vacuum that's opened in what used to be the space between neoconservative interventionism and Paul-style isolationism.
Conservative Times: "... The fact that what Ron Paul said is an indisputable fact is of no consequence to these intellectual and emotional children. In the minds of the post-9/11 War on Terror cultists, some things, true or not, are just not supposed to be said."
d-day: "...Rudy Giuliani got to pull his 9-11 card out by attacking Ron Paul for daring to suggest the concept of blowback which is well-known to anyone whose sense of history doesn't perish the past with each passing day...I still say "none of the above" is out to a huge lead."
wizbangblue: "There was a time when the Republican party was known as the one which believed in smaller government and avoiding unnecessary foreign entanglements. Now the Pub's mouthpiece is attacking the only Republican candidate who still believes in those things for not being intrusive and imperialist enough."
Save The GOP: "There is only one thing I don’t completely agree with Paul on regarding last night’s comments. Even if the U.S. hadn’t had a sustained presence in the Middle East over the last twenty something years, I am not certain that we still wouldn’t be feeling some of their aggression. Islamic fundamentalism plays a large part in the role on exercising terror across the globe."
The S Factor: "...the argument being made by Bushies/Giulianites is that we should disregard any consequences of our foreign policy that end up promoting terrorism, because doing so would be allowing the terrorists to dicate our foreign policy, since we would be taking their behavioral responses to our policies into account."
Dean Barnett, blogging for Hugh Hewitt: "I was actually thinking of doing a serious post about Ron Paul. However briefly, I pondered preparing a scholarly inquiry into why it is that he’s the very definition of a crank."
Mike The Actuary's Musings: "Whether Dr. Paul is correct is an arguable point. Regardless of that, regardless of Ron’s intellect and his sincere belief in libertarian principles… the fact that he’d expose such a stance in a televised debate shows a certain cluelessness which should disqualify him from office."
Comments