Posted on 12/15/2011 11:08:26 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Political blogger Andrew Sullivan has made an endorsement among this year’s ever-thinning field crop of GOP presidential contenders, and it’s none other than Ron Paul.
On his Daily Beast blog “The Dish,” Sullivan writes that, initially, he had his eye on Jon Huntsman, praising for the former governor of Utah’s tax reform proposals and his experience with foreign relations (particularly where China is concerned, as well as his level-headed approach and — as Sullivan puts it — his “conservative position” when it comes to global warming. However, Sullivan has been less than enthused with what he describes as Huntsman’s “mediocre campaign” and apparent inability to connect with voters on a widespread level.
Sullivan is also sure to note that he does not support many of Paul’s “nuttier policy proposals,” adding that the candidate has “had associations in the past that are creepy when not downright ugly.” That said, he believes Paul is a candidate of principle, as well as one who remains consistent and genuine:
And I see in Paul none of the resentment that burns in Gingrich or the fakeness that defines Romney or the fascistic strains in Perry’s buffoonery. He has yet to show the Obama-derangement of his peers, even though he differs with him. He has now gone through two primary elections without compromising an inch of his character or his philosophy. This kind of rigidity has its flaws, but, in the context of the Newt Romney blur, it is refreshing. He would never take $1.8 million from Freddie Mac. He would never disown Reagan, as Romney once did. He would never speak of lynching Bernanke, as Perry threatened. When he answers a question, you can see that he is genuinely listening to it and responding – rather than searching, Bachmann-like, for the one-liner to rouse the base. He is, in other words, a decent fellow, and that’s an adjective I don’t use lightly. We need more decency among Republicans.
Agree? And, regardless of how you feel about Paul as a candidate compared to his GOP rivals, how do you predict he’d fare against Barack Obama?
Maybe the libertarians weren’t on tonight.
ROFL, well to begin with, who on earth looks to Andrew Sullivan to define and judge “decency”???????
At least you know where Paul stands....he’s not a squish like Gingrich, Romney, or Perry. He actually believes in something and does not pander for votes.
What a horrific field this is. Marco Rubio could jump in the race right now and win it with only the states he can still get on the ballot.
I didn’t mean “how did we miss this” in a good way. Andrew Sullivan is as repulsive as the slime that gathers in a Nairobi truck stop urinal. His endorsement should be the final nail in the coffin of any candidate.
“At least you know where Paul stands....”
Umm, you think that might be the problem??
It NEVER ceases to amaze me that jimrob alows non-conservative Paulbots to ‘mingle’ with the decent folk here.
I did my best but you just had to post it. lol
Lookie here!
RuPaul has won the endorsement of a disease ridden pseudo intellectual faggotblogger.
Whodathunkit?
I would think that the crazy-old-uncle rant in the latest debate would have done it, but Paulbots are a strange lot.
The guy seriously sounded like some whackjob who'd been off his meds for a while.
oh don’t worry, I never took you for an admirer of Andrew Sullivan!
I enjoy your threads and comments on FR....
Paul has a squish making recommendations for him, the butt boy andy sullivan, and you call those three squishy.
Paul is a libertarian loon that believes that unicorn sh*t tastes like grape jelly.
Can you actually see this old bitter nitwit being the President of the US?
I just wondered who Sullivan meant by "we." Was he speaking for all the other deranged HIV+ lapsed Catholic wannabe obstetricians with Palin Derangement Syndrome?
Or maybe it matters naught. Don't look now, but he's in second place, closing in on Newt and pundits are predicting he might win Iowa. Also means nothing. Howard Dean won Iowa and imploded.
That kind of thinking gave us Obama in 2008.
Decency? Homosexuality? Hmmmmm
A case of the pot calling the kettle black
This places all of his attacks on Sarah Palin in a wholly new light.
How so?
I don't believe that Ron Paul should be any where near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and that is why we have obama?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.