Newt Gingrich tells it like it is about Ron Paul
Asked whether he could vote for Paul, Gingrich replied, "No." If Obama were the alternative? "You'd have a very hard choice at that point."
I wouldn't, personally. A sickening choice, yes- but not a hard one. As little use as I have for Barack Obama's policies, I'd vote to re-elect him in a heartbeat if Ron Paul were the alternative. The election of a naif like Paul would be the greatest threat to our national security in my lifetime.
"I think Barack Obama is very destructive to the future of the United States," Gingrich told CNN's Wolf Blitzer Tuesday. "I think Ron Paul's views are totally outside the mainstream of virtually every decent American."
"As people get to know more about Ron Paul, who disowns 10 years of his own newsletter, says he didn't really realize what was in it, had no idea what he was making money off of, had no idea that it was racist, anti-Semitic, called for the destruction of Israel, talked about a race war - all of this is a sudden shock to Ron Paul?" Gingrich wondered. "There will come a morning people won't take him as a serious person."
For reasonable people who know Paul's record, of course, that morning dawned a long time ago.
Accusing Paul of a "total record of systemic avoidance of reality,"Gingrich called thes Texas congressman "a person who thinks the United States was responsible for 9/11, a person who ... wrote in his newsletter that the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 might have been a CIA plot, a person who believes it doesn't matter if the Iranians have a nuclear weapon."
Many of those charges, it should be noted, come from that newsletter, which Paul published for ten years, but about whose contents and even the authors of many articles he claims to be ignorant. The business about the United States being to blame for 9/11, however, is not.
Michele Bachmann, meanwhile, has also chimed in, calling Paul's isolationist views on foreign policy "dangerous for the United States."
HT: Drudge
Comments