Hannity about to go on attack

[iamse7en]

Who is Jeffery Lord of the American Spectator? That's who they are bringing in to trash Paul.

See this for a taste... I believe Jack Hunter (and maybe Tom Woods) has gone up against the guy before...

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1...-8&q=site:spectator.org+ron+paul+jeffrey+lord

 

[airborne373]

Sean Hannity and his clown college compatriot Rush Limbaugh have lost 30% of their audiences lying for the state.

http://www.businessinsider.com/rush-limbaugh-hannity-imus-radio-ratings-2011-5

 

[sailingaway]

He's going to keep talking to Romney after the break, but he did say this:

"Later on, Ron Paul, [newsletters] are there things in them that the media hasn't vetted yet?"

Talking to someone with the American Spectator about it.

Jeffery Lord? LOL! Lord and Levin, call out the baying hounds.

 

[Jtorsella]

How did this happen? I thought Rand had silenced Hannity.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Hannity will be interviewing Jeffery Lord, American Spectator:

In August 2011, Jeffrey Lord wrote an article in The American Spectator which was critical of Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), and the views of some of Ron Paul's supporters.[5] It sparked considerable debate within the conservative movement.

 

[lew]

are you working for some other candidate?

oh shut up. If you think Paul can weather a charge of racism, with the EVIDENCE BEING A NEWSLETTER WITH HIS OWN NAME ACROSS THE BANNER, simply by stating what he said in 2008, you're a moron. As Paul rises in the polls, he will be hit hard with this. And he needs to provide an answer that the masses will accept. If he acts like Cain and just tries to ignore it or say it's history, he will lose, exactly like Cain.

 

[Xchange]

 

[ord33]

Apparently this guy is often going after Paul:

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/23/ron-paul-and-the-neoliberal-re

It looks like he makes a living by hating Ron Paul: http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-....,cf.osb&fp=6b7d8689dc994193&biw=1366&bih=667

Some really nasty stuff.

 

[Publicani]

Hannity is bringing Jeffrey Lord from American spectator.
Tom woods responded to this crap a w few months ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YpP80_J5N8

 

[specsaregood]

what does this mean: “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational.”"

Thats all? Are you saying that isn't true?

 

[wgadget]

Who is Jeffery Lord of the American Spectator? That's who they are bringing in to trash Paul.

OMG...LORD IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST NEOCON LIARS OUT THERE.

I heard him one day on Medved, and he is a fool whose logic makes NO SENSE.

 

[Give me liberty]

Hannity will be interviewing Jeffery Lord, American Spectator:

Ah you mean this werdio Jeffery?

 

[sailingaway]

You guys aren't being consistent here. Don't act like that if there was some Newsletter that went out for 20 years under Romney's or Newt's name, that we wouldn't be clamoring to make commercials about it.

The fact is that these Newsletters exist. They've always been the bane in Ron Paul's possibility to rise in the polls. It doesn't matter what Raimondo thinks about the issue or you or I. What matters is how Paul will respond when the MSM says "So, in your Newsletter that bares your name, what does this mean: “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational.”"

The Campaign can't be so stupid to think they can just ignore this, refuse to say who the author is, state it's 'ancient history', or any of that mumbo jumbo and expect it to go away. The masses will want some heartfelt apology that the material is downright awful and that he utterly regrets it. Anything less, and the MSM will hammer this. And we will lose. This is the pivotal thorn in his entire campaign.

Ron wouldn't, and no, we would snark about them, but not expect it to be such a huge deal when everyone knows he didn't write them. They always start at the 'he said' rather than 'it was written in a 'Ron Paul Newsletter''' and only later in the media cycle concede he didn't write them. They would not give this treatment to anyone else over what at most was a lack of oversight in a personal business matter.

And you know why they wouldn't with others, and why they do with Ron?

BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING ELSE.

The man is as clean as a whistle.

 

[Inkblots]

Jeff Lord is an ahistorical twit who doesn't understand anything about the conservative position, lies or is genuinely ignorant of America's foreign policy throughout the 20th century, and thinks simply asserting Ron Paul is a liberal and a racist is a winning argument.

The doofus even called Ron Paul a "neo-liberal", hilariously failing to grasp that that is an actual academic term for the foreign policy Jeff Lord himself espouses!

 

[JamesButabi]

Guess he didn't get enough snowballs last time. Some people never learn

 

[Havax]

I'm sure Hannity got the word from above to cancel the interview with Ron since the plan is now to trash him as hard as possible. I fully expect the debate tomorrow to be absolutely absurd and dirty.

 

[wgadget]

Sean Hannity and his clown college compatriot Rush Limbaugh have lost 30% of their audiences lying for the state.

http://www.businessinsider.com/rush-limbaugh-hannity-imus-radio-ratings-2011-5

Fantastic news!

 

[69360]

oh shut up. If you think Paul can weather a charge of racism, with the EVIDENCE BEING A NEWSLETTER WITH HIS OWN NAME ACROSS THE BANNER, simply by stating what he said in 2008, you're a moron. As Paul rises in the polls, he will be hit hard with this. And he needs to provide an answer that the masses will accept. If he acts like Cain and just tries to ignore it or say it's history, he will lose, exactly like Cain.

Newt got away with racism without hardly a blink. "Spanish is the language of the Ghetto" "Palestinians are an invented people"

This is a GOP primary.

Plus nobody believes somebody with Ron's record wrote them.

It's not the big deal people on here are making it out to be. It's a dying gasp of the Neocons before their world gets turned upside down in 3 weeks.

 

[lew]

Thats all? Are you saying that isn't true?

Cool. Expect to lose the election with this tripe.

 

[dmitchell]

Well, I kinda thought taking moral responsibility for something was the whole point of an apology?

It isn't. Can you think of any time in your life when someone wronged you and you would have been satisfied with, "I take moral responsibility for it?" Need to hear those words, "I'm sorry," in my opinion.