Meanwhile, on the Fringes...

|1.16.08 @ 12:46AM|#

I'm genuinely surprised that Ron Paul scored his first fourth place finish in Michigan

Hey, we made a difference! It's not just home foreclosures and urban decay, rest of the country!

JMR|1.16.08 @ 12:47AM|#

As to why he seems to have more Hollywood support now than ever before, I'm clueless.

That's the least mysterious thing of all - Hollywood trending the exact opposite of reality.

|1.16.08 @ 1:01AM|#

It's the economy.

No, but seriously, he only got 6%. Not good. I always look at it in two ways:

1. Holy S***! Ron Paul got 47000 votes! We're not alone!
and then
2. But that's only 6%. :(

|1.16.08 @ 1:13AM|#

Check this out on McCain: http://www.usvetdsp.com/dec07/mccain_suicide_ptsd.htm

|1.16.08 @ 1:15AM|#

Ron Paul's brother David is a Lutheran minister in Grand Rapids Michigan. David has been very supportive of his brother's campaign.

Franklin Harris|1.16.08 @ 1:19AM|#

I'm genuinely surprised that Ron Paul scored his first fourth place finish in Michigan, a state where his organization has always been weak, certainly weaker than in Iowa or New Hampshire.

That Paul placed higher in Michigan and Iowa(!) than in New Hampshire may be the best indication that the Ron Paul Revolution is a different demographic than the traditional libertarian demographic. And since I don't think these are people who are backing Paul because of a few old newsletters, this is probably a good thing. The question becomes then, can traditional libertarianism (cosmo, paleo, or otherwise) offer these folks anything that keeps them around? And, for what it's worth, judging by the grassroots Revolution's online presence, I'd say most of these people are socially cosmo-libertarian and economically paleo-libertarian. So, who in this fractious movement, where old grudges seem to fuel the divisions as much as genuine philosophical differences do, can step up and hold the Revolutionaries together?

crestal jesus|1.16.08 @ 1:21AM|#

Dennis Kucinich is a spiritually grounded person. A handful of creative people based in Hollywood pick up on that...

|1.16.08 @ 1:21AM|#

The Ron Paul campaign is moving slow, but steady. The disarray among the front runners leaves the door open and if he can pull a top 3 in Nevada things will change quick like they did for Huck and McCain. This Ron Paul supporter thinks things are just getting started.

PS - Guess who has the most money on hand for Super Tuesday?
PPS - Guess who benefits from the coming depression?

Franklin Harris|1.16.08 @ 1:22AM|#

Dennis Kucinich is a spiritually grounded person.

Somehow, grounded is not a word I associate with him.

This Theory, It\'s Broken|1.16.08 @ 1:28AM|#

handful of creative people based in Hollywood

There aren't that many.

tepid|1.16.08 @ 1:34AM|#

In fairness, the cosmonauts at Reason are saving face by dissociating themselves from the Paul campaign. The rest of us need not worry so much about image, instead choosing to vote on record and policy prescriptions.

Kolohe|1.16.08 @ 1:36AM|#

31 percent of the vote and eight delegates out of Hawaii.

As prolefeed has stated elsewhere, HI has voting idiosyncrasies that do not correspond to any other mainland location. (Alaska has similar eccentricities, but on the opposite end of the political spectrum). For instance, Neil Abecrombie is the actual person that people try to caricature Nancy Pelosi as being. So, Kucinich 'success' is just Hawaii being itself, and had very little to do what the candidate or his campaign did or not do.

Incidentally, this is not likely to be repeated as Obama has nearly universal Democratic support due his local roots, and every local pol that has endorsed anyone has come out and endorsed him.

Doug D|1.16.08 @ 1:36AM|#

Two telling stats from the exit polls:

12% of respondents thought Ron Paul would be the most likely to effect needed change in the country, but only 48% of them voted for him.

19% of Republican primary voters were STRONGLY opposed to the Iraq war, but Ron Paul earned just 20% of their support. John "100 Years War" McCain chalked up 35%.

Mad Max|1.16.08 @ 1:38AM|#

"Ron Paul's brother David is a Lutheran minister in Grand Rapids Michigan. David has been very supportive of his brother's campaign."

Isn't it great to have a candidate whose family supports him! What do you think, Eric?

"And, for what it's worth, judging by the grassroots Revolution's online presence, I'd say most of these people are socially cosmo-libertarian and economically paleo-libertarian."

I'm a libertarian paleoconservative, and I don't think I'm the only Paul supporter who fits some such description. Social liberals are, of course, another part of the good Dr.'s rainbow coalition.

"Dennis Kucinich is a spiritually grounded person. A handful of creative people based in Hollywood pick up on that..."

Spiritually grounded like the Dalai Llama or L. Ron Hubbard?

Stephen Gordon|1.16.08 @ 1:38AM|#

The question becomes then, can traditional libertarianism (cosmo, paleo, or otherwise) offer these folks anything that keeps them around? And, for what it's worth, judging by the grassroots Revolution's online presence, I'd say most of these people are socially cosmo-libertarian and economically paleo-libertarian. So, who in this fractious movement, where old grudges seem to fuel the divisions as much as genuine philosophical differences do, can step up and hold the Revolutionaries together?

In the old days, one might arrange a marriage between children of various noble libertarian families in order to unite kingdoms or maintain peaceful relationships.

Perhaps if one of the Koch children wed a child of Lew Rockwell (please no lovechild of Rockwell/Sheehan snark, I can't bear the mental image), the libertarian movement would be united, thus powerful enough to broker a deal with the Kingdom of rEVOLution.

Tom Walls|1.16.08 @ 1:38AM|#

According to the extremely interesting exit polls, Ron's largest base of supporters were 18-29 year old, politically independent, mostly non-religious, with at least some college, generally in favor of abortion being legal.

He got little to no support from seasoned citizens ("Ron who? eh?) or evangelicals.

But he cleaned house with da independent yout vote. That's where to focus the efforts going forward.

Huckabee has some crossover appeal to evangelical Dems, but I can't see him doing well in places like New Yawk or California.

Tom, social cosmolibertarian and economic paleolibertarian

Mad Max|1.16.08 @ 1:53AM|#

I just recently learned the word "cosmotarian." I'm guessing that it means something like this:

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/you/healthy/sex/a/abortion-options?click=main_sr

|1.16.08 @ 1:59AM|#

Well, I think people will be giving Paul another look. The NYT has an article titled
Paul Beats Giuliani (Again). Kind of a provocative title for the paper of record....

Win the nomination, he certainly won't. But he's certainly carved out a substantial and consistent constituency. It looks like he's going to cause enough pain and aggravation to announce us as a significant voting block.

Ken Hagler|1.16.08 @ 2:07AM|#

"As to why [Kucinich] seems to have more Hollywood support now than ever before, I'm clueless."

It's not like there are a lot of Commies opposed to the Iraq war for them to choose from...

Alister|1.16.08 @ 2:15AM|#

This guy suggests that Welch, Wiegel and Gillespie are part of the "Orange Line Mafia" (funny stuff).

Alister|1.16.08 @ 2:22AM|#

Those crazy Ron Paul supporters.

|1.16.08 @ 2:28AM|#

Anatomy of a smear campaign: A look at how the beltway libertarians tried to ruin RP...

http://formerbeltwaywonk.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/the-orange-line-anatomy-of-a-smear-campaign/

And more on why these so-called libertarians seek to undermine Dr. Paul as they depend on the income tax that Ron Paul seeks to abolish:

http://formerbeltwaywonk.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/january-8-2008/

Joe Allen|1.16.08 @ 2:30AM|#

How can one not think of conspiracy theories having just observed an improbably simultaneous media attack on Ron Paul the day of the New Hampshire primary? A remarkably successful attack that made him plunge from 14% in the polls to an 8% actual vote? After weeks where we heard little about Paul from the mass media and beltway "libertarian" bloggers? TNR from the left, Fox News and talk radio from the right, and piling on from beltway "libertarians" who made a point of loudly repeating the TNR smears and dumping Ron Paul on the day of the primary. Your eyes and ears did not deceive you, all this happened. It is not the result of a criminal conspiracy, but if one uses "conspiracy" as a metaphor for social networks and economic incentives, there is a strong sense in which conspiracy theories accurately, if metaphorically, explain what happened.

The reality behind the conspiratorial metaphor is the social networking between denizens of the Beltway, who sport a wide variety of political labels but are, relative to the rest of the country, a monoculture. I lived there. I went to these parties. These denizens range from the journalists who report the mass media news to various think tank and university scholars at the Cato Institute, George Mason University, and so on. They study Ayn Rand, then marry Andrea Mitchell and testify against tax cuts. Vast amounts of federal money, that stuff that is taken out of your paycheck with such automatic ease, flow into the Beltway area. Directly and indirectly, almost every person who lives in or near the Beltway depends on the very income tax that Ron Paul declared he would abolish - with no replacement!

Many of these paycheck vampires call themselves "libertarians" and inspire us with their libertarian rhetoric to support them with our attention, our blog hits, and our tuition money as well as the tax money that already funds them or their friends. But at the first sign of political incorrectness, all these below-the-Beltway "libertarians" have dumped Ron Paul like yesterday's garbage. Now they can rest easy that they will still be invited to the parties thrown by their lobbyist and government employee and contractor friends, who for a second or two got worried by all those Google searches that Ron Paul might have some influence, resulting in some of them losing their jobs (end the income tax with no replacement?! The guy is obvioiusly a kook, and we don't invite the supporters of kooks to our parties!). Now everybody around the Beltway can go back to partying at the taxpayer's expense. All the money will keep flowing in, hooray!

The lesson millions of young libertarians have now learned from our mass media and our beltway "libertarians"? Libertarian electioneering is futile. Voting is futile. Democracy is futile. It's hip to be "libertarian." But anybody who actually wants liberty is a kook, as can be proven by their association with kooks. Beltway wonks posing as "libertarians" are happy to write things to inflame your hopes for liberty that they don't really mean. Then they make sure that we elect the politicians their friends want - the ones that will enslave your future to pay for full social security for Baby Boomers. The ones that will send you off to foreign lands to kill and die. Not only the journalists who hang out with the government bureaucrats and lobbyists, and not only the politicians who talk sweet while they drain your paycheck and kill your fellow human beings, but even the beltway "libertarians" are happy to let a whole new generation of libertarians go down the tubes in order to keep their Beltway friends happy.

|1.16.08 @ 2:30AM|#

How can one not think of conspiracy theories having just observed an improbably simultaneous media attack on Ron Paul the day of the New Hampshire primary? A remarkably successful attack that made him plunge from 14% in the polls to an 8% actual vote? After weeks where we heard little about Paul from the mass media and beltway "libertarian" bloggers? TNR from the left, Fox News and talk radio from the right, and piling on from beltway "libertarians" who made a point of loudly repeating the TNR smears and dumping Ron Paul on the day of the primary. Your eyes and ears did not deceive you, all this happened. It is not the result of a criminal conspiracy, but if one uses "conspiracy" as a metaphor for social networks and economic incentives, there is a strong sense in which conspiracy theories accurately, if metaphorically, explain what happened.

The reality behind the conspiratorial metaphor is the social networking between denizens of the Beltway, who sport a wide variety of political labels but are, relative to the rest of the country, a monoculture. I lived there. I went to these parties. These denizens range from the journalists who report the mass media news to various think tank and university scholars at the Cato Institute, George Mason University, and so on. They study Ayn Rand, then marry Andrea Mitchell and testify against tax cuts. Vast amounts of federal money, that stuff that is taken out of your paycheck with such automatic ease, flow into the Beltway area. Directly and indirectly, almost every person who lives in or near the Beltway depends on the very income tax that Ron Paul declared he would abolish - with no replacement!

Many of these paycheck vampires call themselves "libertarians" and inspire us with their libertarian rhetoric to support them with our attention, our blog hits, and our tuition money as well as the tax money that already funds them or their friends. But at the first sign of political incorrectness, all these below-the-Beltway "libertarians" have dumped Ron Paul like yesterday's garbage. Now they can rest easy that they will still be invited to the parties thrown by their lobbyist and government employee and contractor friends, who for a second or two got worried by all those Google searches that Ron Paul might have some influence, resulting in some of them losing their jobs (end the income tax with no replacement?! The guy is obvioiusly a kook, and we don't invite the supporters of kooks to our parties!). Now everybody around the Beltway can go back to partying at the taxpayer's expense. All the money will keep flowing in, hooray!

The lesson millions of young libertarians have now learned from our mass media and our beltway "libertarians"? Libertarian electioneering is futile. Voting is futile. Democracy is futile. It's hip to be "libertarian." But anybody who actually wants liberty is a kook, as can be proven by their association with kooks. Beltway wonks posing as "libertarians" are happy to write things to inflame your hopes for liberty that they don't really mean. Then they make sure that we elect the politicians their friends want - the ones that will enslave your future to pay for full social security for Baby Boomers. The ones that will send you off to foreign lands to kill and die. Not only the journalists who hang out with the government bureaucrats and lobbyists, and not only the politicians who talk sweet while they drain your paycheck and kill your fellow human beings, but even the beltway "libertarians" are happy to let a whole new generation of libertarians go down the tubes in order to keep their Beltway friends happy.

http://formerbeltwaywonk.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/january-8-2008/

Kolohe|1.16.08 @ 2:46AM|#

"How can one not think of conspiracy theories having just observed an improbably simultaneous..."

..posts by Frank and Joe Allen?

(Thomas however, is a lone gunman)

|1.16.08 @ 5:21AM|#

"He got an iota of cred from the 2004 race and it's totally gone now. As to why he seems to have more Hollywood support now than ever before, I'm clueless."

Are you suggesting that there are no good reasons to support a candidate if his campaign lacks "credibility"? Given that Kucinich is the ONLY Democratic candidate to take a firm stance against imperialistic wars, is it really so confusing that he would have strong Hollywood support?

sand and cotton|1.16.08 @ 5:39AM|#

"How can one not think of conspiracy theories having just observed an improbably simultaneous media attack on Ron Paul the day of the New Hampshire primary? A remarkably successful attack that made him plunge from 14% in the polls to an 8% actual vote?"

Actually the polls predicted about 8% in NH. There may have been some hope of beating Giuliani with a boost of independents and young voters, but the Obama/McCain pull put an end to that hope.

The newsletters, the TNR article, the Reason blog smears turned out to be irrelevant.

|1.16.08 @ 6:06AM|#

Your comments on Kucinich got me thinking: Assuming the MLK money bomb doesn't bomb, then Paul will be funded until the convention, while the Fox News Five gets reduced to the Fox News One; as each one drops out, some of the protest vote will come his way; and he may hit 30% by the April or May primaries. That will make for a highly interesting convention: even if another candidate has the nomination clinched by that time, they'll have to do something about Paul and his delegates.

It's interesting how Paul and Kucinich get along - they've both said they'd like the other as a running mate - and how they elicit the same reaction: either you'd follow them anywhere, or you think they're nuts.

I wonder if there's any truth to the story that they're either aliens or in league with them, as this story claims:
http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/ron.htm
(Actually, I don't wonder about that; I just think it's a more interesting story than the "racist" one, and wish more people would write about it instead.)

|1.16.08 @ 6:19AM|#

Paul will be funded until the convention, while the Fox News Five gets reduced to the Fox News One; as each one drops out

I don't think that there's any credibility to idea that any of the top three (Romney, McCain and Huckabee) will drop out prior to the convention. you might knock off Huckadizzle in that time, but I guarantee that Romney will ride this thing out, along with McCain.

I'm calling it now: Mitt Romney will be the next President. I am hoping that Paul does pick up some protest votes and splits the Republican party, but I don't think that's going to happen.

|1.16.08 @ 6:19AM|#

"Two telling stats from the exit polls:

12% of respondents thought Ron Paul would be the most likely to effect needed change in the country, but only 48% of them voted for him.

19% of Republican primary voters were STRONGLY opposed to the Iraq war, but Ron Paul earned just 20% of their support. John "100 Years War" McCain chalked up 35%."

Telling of what.

Either more than half of the primary voters don't know who Paul is,

Or they are retarded, who can't make simple causal connections like "if x, then y".

Eric Dondero|1.16.08 @ 7:23AM|#

Franklin Harris is exactly right. I've spent a lot of time politicking in Michigan. Franklin pegs it. Michiganders, particularly around Macomb County are "fiscally paleo-libertarian yet socially cosmo-libertarian."

They are populist leaning on bread and butter issues, but like their beer, nightclubs, taverns, smoking rights and especially sexual freedoms.

Take a Dave Boaz, and morph them in with a Lew Rockwell, and you have the typical Michigan Republican voter.

Eric Dondero|1.16.08 @ 7:24AM|#

Frank, Ron Paul did not get "8%" in New Hampshire, but rather 7.7%.

Also, note he lost Wyoming badly, a state where his supporters were predicting a "huge surprise victory." He didn't gain one single delegate there.

Shane Brady|1.16.08 @ 7:32AM|#

Is it better to have placed higher but have a lower % of the vote? Hasn't Ron Paul gone from 10% in IA, to 7.7% in NH, to 6.3% in Michigan?

Do Ron Paul supporters actually think he's going to win the nomination?

|1.16.08 @ 7:51AM|#

Only party regulars could vote in Wyoming

Jacob|1.16.08 @ 8:12AM|#

If Kucinich got any support from the media, then he could do at least as well as 2004.

|1.16.08 @ 8:13AM|#

It's becoming quite clear that TNR's smear piece hasn't had the effect of destroying Ron Paul's campaign. Money keeps flowing in and he still can beat Giuliani and Thompson.

This is freaking hilarious!

|1.16.08 @ 8:20AM|#

"who benefits from the coming depression?"

The banks?

-jcr

|1.16.08 @ 8:20AM|#

Ayn_Randian: don't think that there's any credibility to idea that any of the top three (Romney, McCain and Huckabee) will drop out prior to the convention."

It's unlikely, considering how things have played out so far; but there's always a chance the nomination could be clinched as early as Feb. 5.

"I'm calling it now: Mitt Romney will be the next President."

Even that would be better than what I've been dreading, a McCain/Huckabee ticket.

"I am hoping that Paul does pick up some protest votes and splits the Republican party, but I don't think that's going to happen."

I think his vote will grow, in any case. One encouraging sign this time was the endorsement by the Muslim Observer calling for a block vote for Paul; that's a community that was by and large ignoring him before. (Of course, that may have happened because Obama wasn't running.)

|1.16.08 @ 8:23AM|#

Do Ron Paul supporters actually think he's going to win the nomination?

I'm sure some do...mostly I think supporters hope to have influence. It's been awhile, but a brokered convention can confer greater influence on small delegate totals...influence is a worthy goal for Paul supporters.

|1.16.08 @ 8:33AM|#

"who benefits from the coming depression?"

The banks?

Probably the Democrats' candidate - like when Bush's father ran for President.

|1.16.08 @ 8:51AM|#

Poor Eric Dondero.

Voters keep choosing Ron Paul over America's most fascist mayor.

Must be tough for Eric and Jamie Kirchick to swallow this.

Better whip that Giuliani campaign into shape, boys.

|1.16.08 @ 8:54AM|#

I can only assume that people who don't understand his following haven't actually read his record and the speeches he has given on the house of representatives website. Or they of course could simply believe our government knows what it is doing, which seems like a joke to me.

Paul's record really is stable. The country is not stable. And in all honesty the media and government are the fringe. The majority of people agree with what Paul has to say, most just assume the media knows what its talking about when it mentions Paul followers as the fringes and never bother to get more info on Paul.

DavidS|1.16.08 @ 8:56AM|#

Voters keep choosing Ron Paul over America's most fascist mayor.

I'm confused. Are you suggesting Rudy's some kind of liberal?

Jim Peterson|1.16.08 @ 9:02AM|#

Exactly. Influence is key. Howard Dean won control of the DNC for his efforts.

I would say Dean was highly successful and his supporters should be proud of what they achieved.

|1.16.08 @ 9:13AM|#

I stand behind my prediction from back in the summer that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee.

I don't know, Ayn_Randian, if I think he'll make it to the white house.

|1.16.08 @ 9:25AM|#

I have to agree with Eric Dondero. Where was that Wyoming surprise for Ron Paul? Sure, you may not have heard all the ballyhoo about how important Wyoming was for the Paul campaign, but his loss there really hurt his chances in later contests. Look no further than Wyoming to explain Paul's underwhelming performance in New Hampshire.

What I don't get is why Wyoming results don't get that early state media blitz like Iowa and New Hampshire, as important as it is.

Jennifer|1.16.08 @ 9:35AM|#

What I don't get is why Wyoming results don't get that early state media blitz like Iowa and New Hampshire, as important as it is.

Because we in the MSM know that Wyoming, unlike Iowa or New Hampshire, will cease to matter or even exist once the inevitable Yellowstone supervolcanic eruption takes place. Why invest in a place with no future?

|1.16.08 @ 9:40AM|#

"I'm confused. Are you suggesting Rudy's some kind of liberal?"

No, DavidS. I am suggesting that to be a strong-arm dictator is Giuliani's ultimate dream.

He will happily send tanks into the streets of America to take over property so that he can build the ultimate government owned and operated Disneyland.

I think the man is bent on remaking America in his own vision sort of like the current dictator in DC is bent on remaking the Middle East into his own vision. Of course, he will continue the remaking of the Middle East, too.

The only real difference is that Giuliani may not say that "God told him to do it". He will just happily admit that it is all his own idea.

I am waiting to see if all that Florida stumping helps the mayor. Rumor has it that he is slipping there in spite of time and money spent...

K Parsons|1.16.08 @ 9:59AM|#

Ron Paul scored so high in Michigan because there was a groundswell of Democrats who, since they could not have an impact in their own party's primary, encouraged other Democrats to cross over and vote for Paul to make the frontrunner's win, whoever he was, a little less meaningful. It was a big topic of discussion among Mid-Michigan Democrats.

Ali|1.16.08 @ 10:06AM|#

That is very funny because I actually agree with Eric, too.

I was surprised, Eric, that SE Michigan's middle eastern population did not come out to vote for him (I mean, look at Paul's mideast policies). I do not understand this. Eric, what do you think?

VM|1.16.08 @ 10:29AM|#

Jake Boone is a man of great honor, and character.

well played, Sir!
respectfully,
VM

Jim Peterson|1.16.08 @ 10:30AM|#

K Parsons is incorrect. The Democrats voted for Romney as part of an organized plan, which you can read about at www.dailykos.com, to promote the Republican most capable of losing the general. Also, Thompson and Giuliani supporters voted for Romney in order to stop McCain's momentum in this particular race.

There was a lot of strategic voting going on that may have given Romney the edge.

I might have voted for Romney for that reason even though I support Ron Paul.

The Democrats feared John McCain because they believed that their own kind plus independents would defect in the general and vote for him (they did not understand that conservatives would sooner vote for Hillary than McCain because at least Hillary is honest about wanting to screw them over).

We can all be happy that McCain was defeated.

About Wyoming: Ron Paul often got 45% of the vote compared to 55% for Romney on each of the delegates that he lost there. It was very close and Ron Paul would easily take Wyoming in the general.

|1.16.08 @ 10:36AM|#

"That Paul placed higher in Michigan and Iowa(!) than in New Hampshire may be the best indication that the Ron Paul Revolution is a different demographic than the traditional libertarian demographic."

Nope.

1. It goes to show LOTS of folks are moving up from Mass and turning out state away from the Live Free or Die premise

2. It was a beautiful day last Tuesday, fair weather voters came out in droves. I worked the polls most of them didn't even know which ballot the candidate they wanted to vote for was on. They all just voted what the media told them too.

3. All you Reason folks need to move to NH as part of the Free State and help us take back this state!!

sand and cotton|1.16.08 @ 2:49PM|#

Wyoming:

Ron Paul didn't win Wyoming or get any delegates, true. But Romney won and Thompson did well. Yet until yesterday Romney was fighting to save his sinking ship, and Thompson is essentially done. So it wasn't much of a victory, considering the party tools sided with the statist cyborgs.

Beating out Rudy and the lazy Reagan in a few states is certainly a good showing. Did anyone expect that back in May?

Eric Dodndero:

Do you like how Romney offered Michigan everything and the kitchen sink to improve the state's economy. I'm not sure how a "libertarian republican" President can do the things he promised, which included micromanaging whole industries and the entire state....he's got the rest of the country to run.

Brandybuck|1.16.08 @ 3:24PM|#

"Fiscally paleo-libertarian and socially cosmo-libertarian." WTF?

A real libertarian is going to be both. A real libertarian is going to be against government control over the economy. A real libertarian is going to be against the government war on drugs. There is certainly room for disagreement on some specific issues, but a true libertarian is going to be against big government in all areas of life.

Where the cosmotarians err is in thinking social issues are the only issues. They are liberals who favor medical marijuana, when most liberals already favor medical marijuana. They are content with merely reducing the rate of government growth. They are content in merely shifting around budget priorities. They are content with a Federal Reserve that will give them cheap loans on their Georgetown mortgage.

K Parsons|1.17.08 @ 11:25AM|#

Hey, Jim, just reporting firsthand what I heard, firsthand, from talking to people actually here in Mid-Michigan about their plans to vote. As opposed to reading someone's opinion from somewhere else.

|1.17.08 @ 2:23PM|#

All this controversy is giving me the vapors.

I have read James Kirchick's article and Eric Dondero's smears all over the Internet. I watched the Tucker interview on MSNBC and Kirchick revealed the existence of a secret code used by Ron Paul for his favored followers.

I have watched and re-watched YouTubes of Ron Paul speaking in all kinds of settings. I have studied his body language and counted his eye blinks. I have watched his hand movements. I have listened to the words over and over again.

I cannot figure out the CODE!! What is the code that Ron Paul uses to "speak to his followers"? Dammit, not knowing the code means that I am not dedicated enough to Ron Paul to be a close follower. I cannot live this way.

HELPPP MEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!...... I must crack the code!!!!!........

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements