Two Ways to Keep Fighting for Ron Paul

Sue the Republican Party, or Become the Republican Party?


Ron Paul’s latest video epistle to his apostles is a delightful example of Paul’s curious, strangely winning political appeal. The congressman, still officially running for president against an opponent Paul already admits has won (but still refuses to endorse, with a “no way” to Wolf Blitzer when asked this week), is clearly speaking extemporaneously as he humbly thanks his delegates.

Paul grants he could be criticized for not winning many states, but stresses his people can still win the war of ideas. He talked about how he’s planning his own gathering the day before the GOP convention begins, and asks his fans to attend.

Paul concludes the freedom movement’s successes have been “magnificent” this time around. There’s a rising new generation excited by his libertarian views, along with the “awakening of the Remnant, the older generation working for a long time” who have arisen in numbers larger than he dreamed.

A few hundred Paul delegates will attend a convention in Tampa in which they will lose to Romney. Paul tells them, “We should not be disruptive, but should also not be pushed around and that to me is very very important.” He talks up his supporters’ possible platform influence—and then turns around and admits it might be fair to say it doesn’t matter much what’s in the platform.

As always, Paul’s directness and honesty keep his fans’ affection close, especially combined with his unique message among national politicians. “The opposition actually thinks too much freedom is bad!” he exclaims, and says his campaign could be the “beginning of the end of the big government authoritarians if we do our job right.”

Exactly the mechanisms by which that might happen are too unclear or uncertain to many of his ardent fans. So a bunch of them, led by lawyer and Paul devotee Richard Gilbert of Santa Ana, California, have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in the central district of California against the Republican National Committee and various state Republican Parties.

The suit is asking the court to decide whether the RNC has the legal right in what qualifies as a federal election to legally bind delegates to vote for any particular candidate, even if the rules of a state party dictate they should be so bound.

The filing also accuses the party of acts of harassment, including violence, and “untimely rule changes designed to deny a quorum or to manipulate delegates” and seeks, among other remedies, an order prohibiting the defendants from “attempting to intimidate with threats of fines or criminal prosecution of any delegate who chooses to vote their conscience.”

The RNC unsurprisingly has called the suit “frivolous” but vowed to fight it. Even many of the Paul hardcore are doubtful about the suit’s merits. Gilbert is frustrated that the official Ron Paul campaign—whose political director Jesse Benton told CNN of the suit, “We have nothing to do with it and do not support it”—didn’t file such as suit themselves.  

A press release from Gilbert's group “Lawyers for Ron Paul” claims Paul supporters have launched a “takeover of the campaign. Refusing to be sold downstream for political or monetary gain the REAL Ron Paul R3volution without reservation is 'in it to win it!'

Gilbert tells me he noticed when Ron Paul was asked about the suit on CNN by Wolf Blitzer, Paul said “it’s not part of our campaign…but at times when we’ve been pushed around it’s because the other side hasn’t followed the rules…and done things to try to prevent us.” Paul added, “If they have a legitimate argument they can make and that’s what they want to do, I’m not gonna say don’t do it.”

“As we watched people being violently beaten at state conventions, voting machines being rigged, ballots being falsely counted from state to state,” Gilbert says, “we observed the Romney machine was nothing more than a crime syndicate committing fraud at every state convention.” While surprised the Paul campaign did not stand up for itself, he says, “I want to say I don’t represent the campaign and I don’t represent Dr. Paul. I represent the delegates.”

While Gilbert fights to unbind the delegates in Tampa to vote for Ron Paul, Paul himself still talks like he doesn’t even expect a speaking slot at the convention—insiders seem to think one for Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) is more likely.

Paul fans are excited by far-off possibilities; as indeed, Ron Paul winning 2 million GOP primary and caucus votes was itself a far-off possibility. Paul campaign advisor Doug Wead is now openly speculating about how the GOP’s “rule 40,” adjusted in 2008 to allow candidate merely holding a plurality of delegates in five states to be placed in nomination, could lead to a floor call for a Ron Paul vice presidency that Romney won’t want to hear.

But the rest of the campaign is being pretty quiet. Ron Paul is off the campaign trail and sitting on over $3 million, which Benton says the campaign plans to use for “aggressive convention programs in multiple states” and "elaborate plans for the national convention,” though those are still unspecified.

Some Paul fans have chosen arenas other than federal lawsuits or the national convention to influence the Republican Party. The Liberty for All SuperPAC, largely financed by 21-year-old Texas millionaire John Ramsey, has given more than half a million dollars  to help win a primary for liberty-minded candidate Thomas Massie in a Kentucky House race.

Liberty for All is now setting its sights on helping make sure Justin Amash—largely considered the best libertarian in the House besides Ron Paul—keeps his redistricted Michigan seat this year. Liberty for All just announced hiring a gaggle of Paul campaign veterans. Paul campaign veterans continue to rise in the GOP and from Iowa to Alaska to Minnesota Paul supporters are becoming party chairs and winning Senate candidacies.

While Paul keeps his distance from Romney, presumptive movement heir Rand Paul endorses Romney and is primed to campaign for him—while excoriating him for his unconstitutional stance on presidential war powers. That role of Loyal Opposition—neither rebel army nor lapdogs—is one Paulite need to cultivate unless they can master Ron Paul's strange gift for winning while doing nothing to appease his own party.

Jim Antle, writing in the American Conservative about Thomas Massie, sums up the case for Paul folk to act as good Republicans—in their own way:

More important than scooping up Ron Paul delegates to the Republican National Convention, Paulites are descending on state and local GOP gatherings to advance like-minded candidates. Local party leaders, of whom the liberty movement can claim an increasing number, may become local elected officials; they also can help swing competitive primaries. People yelling and screaming outside the convention hall seldom have as much power to effect change as those attending the boring meetings inside. It’s a tactic previously used in Republican politics by groups as disparate as the Goldwater movement and the Christian right.

Antle also sums up one way for Paulite candidates to reach beyond just Paul fans—still not more than 15 percent nationally among GOP voters:

Republicans like Massie rely on libertarian activists for fundraising and organizational muscle, putting them in a position to be competitive in the first place. But they don’t simply bank on a money bomb or a Ron Paul endorsement being the game-changer. They campaign on local issues, they build connections with their constituents, and they reach out to a much larger base in the party than the Paul vote, which in some places is merely in the single digits.

Jack Hunter, co-author of Rand Paul’s campaign book The Tea Party Goes to Washington and official Ron Paul campaign blogger, acknowledges that a full-service liberty movement needs not just good candidates (Hunter praises Missouri Senate candidate John Brunner and Michigan House candidate Kerry Bentivolio) and party insiders but outside agitators not beholden to the GOP. Hunter is especially pleased that the Paulite bestselling author and investment guru (and former GOP candidate for Senate from Connecticut) Peter Schiff’s radio show is going national, replacing G. Gordon Liddy. The neocons, Hunter says, “would like nothing better than for us to take our ball and go home” and go third party in frustration over not winning this year, and that would be a mistake.

It’s a long, tricky game the Paulites are trying to play, and while the record of the Christian right in being a quirky outsider group swinging above their weight in the GOP encourages them, by eventually treating party power as an end in itself that same Christian right won very few actual policy victories.

But while the Christian Right were and are fighting a rearguard action against seemingly irresistible social liberalization, the Paul people consider themselves the only sane faction that can turn America from a looming debt-driven collapse. If the libertarian republicans' assessment of the crisis America faces is even close to accurate, history is on their side, even if the Republican Party isn’t.

Senior Editor Brian Doherty is author of Ron Paul’s Revolution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired (Broadside/HarperCollins).

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    OT: Gillespie scheduled to be on Real Time with Bill Maher tonight along with Rachel Maddow and Mort Zuckerman.

    I give the edge to Nick and Mort this time. Zuckerman can bring his liberal cred into the fight.

  • AlmightyJB||

    And than the deer jumped up and ran off.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Ron Paul = Powder?

  • Broseph of Invention||

    I took it as an endorsement of the Paleo diet. Every once in a while the purists require affirmation.

  • Pi Guy||

    "She's dead, Jim."

  • WarrenT||

    I so want the Team Red convention to be disrupted but I think Ron is too classy to let it happen. He'll probably talk the firebrands out of anything to divisive.

  • Suki||

    Agreed that he is too classy, but those fans of his are a whole different kettle of worms.

  • Lysander Jefferson||

    I take that as a compliment from you Suki.

  • XM||

    He doesn't have popular support among the American people. He didn't officially win any primaries, even open ones. His crossover appeal was limited at best. He's not a hit among the two parties that nominated and helped elect maybe 95% of American presidents. He doesn't seem particularly popular among the fast growing Latino population, who probably doesn't care about closing down the federal reserve.

    Where's the excitement? What are his chances? If you stopped some random Asian guy on the streets and asked him who Ron Paul was, would he know? Some college kids love him, but they'll get their asses kicked by the Obama crowd at the polls.

    Gary Johnson is theoretically the truer libertarian. Why no love for him?

  • Bill||

    Because Gary is even less well known? They did not even let him participate in most debates.

    I like Johnson a lot but he won't get to speak at the Repub. convention.

    But if the only way to vote for Paul is to write him in, then it might be better to vote for Johnson rather than Paul. But I want to see what happens at the convention first.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    GJ does not tap into the CT shit (Federal Reserve fearmongering and goldbuggery).

  • Brandon Magoon||

    We don;t really know who won the Primaries and he still outpolls Romney. As for Johnson, as long as he doesn't go out of his way to piss off the Paul people like Barr did, he might do well. There's an interview with Johnson at ronpaulflix . com that reason won't let me post.

  • ||

  • ||

    Chrome + Reasonable

  • Bee Tagger||

    Gary Johnson is theoretically the truer libertarian. Why no love for him?

    The same thing has been said and asked about Ron Paul in relation to Gary Johnson on these threads by Paul fans. The fact is, Reason covers both a lot and generally positively.

  • ||

    Does this some random Asian guy on the street vote?

    But I will for GJ.

  • Lysander Jefferson||

    +10

  • CE||

    Ron Paul is actually very popular around the world.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Is there any reason to exclude the possibility that Gilbert is an Obama agent provocateur?

  • Sevo||

    OT:
    Tesla starts delivering the S sedan.
    For $50K (after we pay the rest), you get a car that goes supposedly 160 miles before you're sitting still. That's Tesla's claim; I'm guessing 100 miles if you start/stop, use the A/C, etc.
    Tesla claims it recharges (assuming you have access to a 220V, 90A circuit) at a 62 mile/hour rate. You do have an arc welder socket in the garage, don't you? If you're planning a trip to the wine country from SF, figure a couple of days, not one.
    For $85K (after we pay the rest), you can get from SF to, oh, SLO (Tesla, 300 miles, EPA, 265, real, likely 250). I'm sure there's a 220V/100A circuit there that means you might get to LA the next day, unless you run into a traffic jam or need the A/C.
    And as for capital to launch this 'wonder', as close as I can find, we have now provided ~$500m, in advance of what we will pay to subsidize the buyers.
    Yes, I beat on this, since it is not an automobile as the term is commonly understood. It's a goddam rich-kid pork-barrel.
    Linkies:
    http://www.teslamotors.com/models/options
    http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts

  • Sevo||

    One more, since this pisses me off:
    Do you drive a car until the tank is empty? Especially if you know you have to search for a 'filling station'?
    Cut 25% off the 'real' ranges; SF to Sonoma for the first, SF to King City for the later.

  • Broseph of Invention||

    I saw this at the Detroit Auto Show; the exhibit was pretty unpopular. I can't imagine subsidizing a luxury car will go over well with most people, even with the "advancing general technology" talking points. I'm against all subsidies, but it seems like the general population is fine with subsidies either for national projects, or for projects that dish out to a large portion of the populace. This is neither.

  • anon||

    Sevo, I take a bit of exception to your argument here. It appears as though you're saying Tesla vehicles are shit because they don't go far and they're supposedly a luxury car.

    I think most commutes in the US are under 40 miles one way. One could easily travel to/from work, grocery store, + any other errands on 150 mile range/day. Most families also have 2 cars, leaving you your Suburban for the longer trips. I could see how this would be OK; hell, if I could get one for $15k I'd probably buy one to get to/from work cheap.

    I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd emphasize the price more than the range.

    The real problem is the price tag. $50k for a car that makes it -impossible- for you to travel out of state, and can't even use the AC in your "luxury" car if you want to go to the beach/mountains. Holy fuck.

  • anon||

    $85K

    For 85k, I can have a Porsche Cayman S and 25k to spend on hookers and blow.

  • Sevo||

    "I think most commutes in the US are under 40 miles one way."

    Yep, and you'd better hope that there's no delays if you want to get home. 80 miles is probably going to have you watching the charge level *real* close.
    Even if it works, you've bought a $50K (after we pay the rest) 'car' you can use for your 'commute'. Oh, goody!
    Ever, like, go skiing? Go on vacation? Go on a weekend jaunt? Maybe to the lake for some fishing?
    Hope you can afford an additional $30K car to do that.
    Sorry, this isn't a 'car' as most people understand the term.

  • SKR||

    How often do you go on road trips? I could get by on rentals for those. Although I need a pickup for work so w/e.

  • Xenocles||

    That doesn't close for me. If I'm buying a car - especially one that costs several times as much as the one I own - I expect it to provide the mobility of the car I have.

  • ||

    If I'm buying a car - especially one that costs several times as much as the one I own - I expect it to provide the mobility of the car I have.

    EXACTLY!

    Progress means shit gets better...NOT FUCKING WORSE!

    Oh, but wait...this IS better since we are saving the planet from certain apocalypse. After all...the science is settled. We have a consensus. Ramifications of a global rise in temperature will certainly be bad. Especially for the poorz, who won't need to heat their cardboard boxes anymore in the winter. ...er wait...something like that...

  • General Butt Naked||

    How often do you go on road trips?

    Every other weekend in the summer I'm at my dad's place helping with the land, and I'd be at the edge of the range for a round trip. He actually has a 220v outlet for a small welder, but it's only 60 amp.

    Also, I like to take trips at least once a month to find new trails/outdoor stuff. There is no way in hell I'd take that thing in the mountains far from an outlet. Hell, I'll fill up my truck just in case I get lost, or something. It's range is greater than 300 miles with a full tank.

    Renting a car is kind of a hassle and I wouldn't want to do it almost every weekend. (I omit the cost, because if I had $50k to spend on a toy car I would be able to afford the rental)

  • General Butt Naked||

    Besides, do you think that range is going to last forever?

    Does your laptop still have the same ability to go unplugged as when you bought it?

  • sloopyinca||

    I'd like to jump in here with a couple of questions:
    I've got several customers that have switched their fleets (tractor trailers) to CNG, and their vehicles get the same mileage as they did with diesel. Their maintenance costs have been the same since the switch 8-10 years ago even if you include constructing fuel depots on their yards. Now, they get the fuel delivered and their cost/gal is about $.60 to fill up in their yard. If they have to fill up, they pay around $2.15 a gal now.

    So, question 1: If there was a hard push to get people to convert to CNG, when would the demand get pushed to the point it was less profitable to change over?

    Question 2: Can I convert or is it easy to purchase a CNG passenger car, and if so, what do they cont relative to gas or diesel cars?

    Question 3: If the environmental impact of CNG vehicles is ultimately comparable to that of electrics, when the source of electricity and the sourcing of materials needed for the batteries is taken into consideration, why is there no push in the enviro movement to get people into CNG vehicles, since their range is so much better?

  • ||

    why is there no push in the enviro movement to get people into CNG vehicles...

    Because fossil fuels is the devil!

  • Pi Guy||

    In the Pi Shack, I've almost finished working out the last few kinks in my SierraClub-Hipster Combustion Engine™. I've found that all that soy and patchouli leaves very little carbon footprint.

  • Pi Guy||

    OTOH, you have to be near NYC or CA, though, to find any place to refuel.

    Still, it's a start.

  • sloopyinca||

    Yeah, I noticed that. Plus, it takes forever to fill a tank at home due to stupid regulations. To fill a tank in less than 8 hours, it'll cost you about $5k for a compressor. To do it in 5 minutes, you'll have to shell out over a half-mil.

  • Xenocles||

    I can take my IC car 400 miles before I have to fill the tank. When the time comes, I can pull in to any of the ubiquitous gas stations in the country (it takes a little more planning on the cross-country stretches, but not much) and be ready for another 400 miles in under ten minutes. Hell, my gas tank lasts longer than my bladder on some trips. Oh, and the gas tank doesn't hold less gas over its lifetime unless it sustains some physical damage. It certainly doesn't need a computer to help me fill it properly.

    The price of an electric is a problem, but the real problem is that the premium you pay gets you a car that grossly underperforms in all of the areas I mentioned above. The only benefits of an electric right now are that it's quiet (which is sort of a safety drawback) and that it doesn't use a small IC engine (which is mostly about feeling good rather than any performance).

  • General Butt Naked||

    and that it doesn't use a small IC engine

    My electricity comes from coal, so I don't know if you'd be doing the environment any favors with an electric car.

  • Xenocles||

    It might be more efficient, but yeah.

  • CE||

    YOu're forgetting about transmission losses in the power grid.

  • anon||

    Two Ways to Keep Fighting for Ron Paul

    Why would one waste time on such a futile effort?

    Stock up on ammo and food. Your dollars will be better spent.

  • Mike M.||

    Yeah, I like and respect Ron Paul, but this is absurd. He's retiring in six months, people.

  • ||

    It’s a long, tricky game the Paulites are trying to play, and while the record of the Christian right in being a quirky outsider group swinging above their weight in the GOP encourages them, by eventually treating party power as an end in itself that same Christian right won very few actual policy victories.

    Ed Meese and John Ashcroft, just for starters, say you're wrong.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    So does the fact that one of the reasons why Romney isn't more accepted by the Team RED establishment is because he's a Mormon.

  • johnd2||

    Ron Paul speaks for a movement that just does not command enough actual voters to win elections. There is no substitute for convincing about 30 million people to see things our way. It matters not what the Paul forces do at the convention except that they need to not look crazy.

  • Srynerson||

    Lack of alt-text fail!

  • Xenocles||

    O/T: I got a link to a LifeHacker article, and when I was done I clicked on some of the sidebar headlines. It seems like half their content these days is cross-posted from Gawker and Jezebel (at least in the jobs topic). Best part is that you can't tell which is which until you load it. At least the comments don't follow the articles over from their parent sites.

  • John||

    So Ron Paul is Star Man? Did he miss his rendezvous at the big crater?

  • John||

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/....._blog.html

    Former Supreme Court Clerks agree that the mandate is a goner. Comments are a sea of stupid.

  • ||

    I see that he's graduated from an unofficial Journolist to actually managing an official self-titled "Wonkblog" with multiple people under him.

    I wonder what dark god he sacrifices to, to get his career arc.

  • John||

    The dark God of douchebag.

  • Mike M.||

    No kidding. Anyone who goes around calling himself a "wonk" is a freaking tool.

  • John||

    Yglesias is just retarded borderline Aspy. Klein is just a tool. Tool is the perfect description of him.

  • sloopyinca||

    Want some real lulz? Click the link imbedded from that story to Ezra's story in the New Yorker where he says everybody thought the AG's who filed suit were crazy when they did so, and he proves it by quoting two--two--people.

    It's Klein at his finest and most partisan. A true masterpiece of spin if you ask me.*

    *By "masterpiece," I mean an utterly forgettable piece of shit written for an echo chamber that could be dissected in about 10 minutes by any 12 year old with access to a laptop or library.

  • John||

    You have to remember Klein is too stupid and too dishonest to look at the actual arguments. All he can do is appeal to authority and spin by saying attacking the source.

  • Scotch Man||

    I care enough about Ron Paul's candidacy to change my registration and vote for him. As relevant as he's become since his '08 bid is as good as it will ever get for him. I can't imagine his son even hangs around for that long now that he's palling around with Romney and spewing social right diaherra. We need to enjoy the moment that there was a guy making the noise Ron Paul made but this is where it ends.

    I'd like to hope Gary Johnson carries the torch next and in a lot of ways, I prefer him to Ron Paul.

  • John||

    What exactly has Rand Paul ever done that can be described as social right?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    He said Obama was gay.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    He has said that he would support an anti-abortion amendment to the Constitution if there ever were one.

    He is socially conservative, I'm just not convinced that he's all that interested in legislating said conservatism.

  • John||

    He is socially conservative, I'm just not convinced that he's all that interested in legislating said conservatism.

    Then his social conservatism is about as relevant to his fitness for office as his choice in NFL team.

  • sloopyinca||

    He has said that he would support an anti-abortion amendment to the Constitution if there ever were one.

    So he values personhood earlier than most? I'd say that's a pretty good thing from a libertarian standpoint.

    For the life of me, I cannot understand how there are libertarians that do not value the personhood of a human being that happens to have residency inside another human being.

  • Xenocles||

    It's the flip-side to your viewpoint, Sloopy. It's not that they don't value the humanity of a fetus, they simply don't believe it exists. For their own reasons they put the fetus outside the human ethical sphere. It's not a premise I fully agree with, but I understand it and I can recognize honest arguments from it.

  • sloopyinca||

    What I hate about that argument is the arbitrary nature of when they grant personhood to someone. They just pull a time during the pregnancy out of their asshole and say that's when personhood starts. At least if it's set at implantation, that recognizes a legitimate change in status. Pregnancies develop at different yet similar rates, so an arbitrary time is just arbitrary...especially since the exact date of fertilization and implantation can never be known for certain.

    I cannot see an honest argument to be made that allows someone to kill another human being in any stage of development unless it is in self-defense. And an implanted fetus is a developing human being, since an overwhelming majority of implanted embryos grow to become fully formed humans unless they are forcibly removed.

  • Xenocles||

    I don't think it has to be completely arbitrary. For example, I believe that humanity comes from the brain so I would support in principle a ban after fetal brain development. (Let's not get into the implications of that stance for other times in life - I can discuss it but it's not germane here.) Implantation seems just as arbitrary - why not conception, where the cell has its complete genome? Why not birth, where the baby takes its first breath?

    Again, I understand that you believe the fetus is always human, but you're begging the question after that. It's very rare to find someone who wants to allow killing young people. All of the discussion revolves around what counts as a person. There's something to be said for casting a wider net, but it's not the only legitimate idea.

  • sloopyinca||

    Implantation seems just as arbitrary - why not conception, where the cell has its complete genome? Why not birth, where the baby takes its first breath?

    Not conception because approximately half of the eggs that are fertilized never implant.

    Not at birth because a baby 10 minutes before birth could live as easily if safely removed than one that has already been pulled out of the womb.

    Implantation is the second essential building block for a human being to develop. And the % of those implanted eggs that grow and develop is extremely high. It is arbitrary, but it's also an established point in development that, once passed, will lead to full humanity for almost all embryos.

    I'm not trying to get into a useless abortion debate, and I know this is a very sticky point of contention among libertarians. I just firmly believe, and always have, that human life is human life, and once it reaches the point that it is pretty certain to develop into a human, it should have the rights of personhood.

    By the way, I respect the counterarguments, I just think they are wrong.

  • Xenocles||

    That's all I ask from anyone in these discussions. Most of the pro-choice people I know seem to be unable to see how anyone but the woman might matter.

  • ||

    If the best you've got on Rand Paul being social right is that he supports an anti-abortion amendment, then you don't really have much. Many libertarians agree with the anti-abortion stance (maybe not necessarily with a federal amendment to the Constitution per se, but with the anti-abortion sentiment nonetheless).

  • Sam Jones||

    Stocking up on ammo, food, water and other supplies is time better spent then on politics. http://wrol.info

  • tee shirt pas cher||

    Paul concludes the freedom movement’s successes have been “magnificent” this time around. There’s a rising new generation excited by his libertarian views, along with the “awakening of the Remnant, the older generation working for a long time” who have arisen in numbers larger than he dreamed.

  • ||

    A few hundred Paul delegates will attend a convention in Tampa in which they will lose to Romney. Paul tells them, “We should not be disruptive, but should also not be pushed around and that to me is very very important.” He talks up his http://www.ceinturesfr.com/cei.....-c-30.html supporters’ possible platform influence—and then turns around and admits it might be fair to say it doesn’t matter much what’s in the platform.

  • Fantocone||

    That is like the best Idea I have heard all day man!

    www.Fresh-Anon.tk

  • Libertardian||

    I am so gay for RoPaul's wrinkled old cock. I also sleep with one of Rand Paul's old toupees.

  • joy||

    a rising new generation excited by his libertarian views, along with the “awakening of the Remnant, the older generation working for a long time” http://www.petwinkel.com/pet-r.....-c-38.html who have arisen in numbers larger than he dreamed.

  • CE||

    So now you can just copy directly from the article and bury the spam link in the quote? Cool.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement