Now Playing at Reason.tv: Tucker Carlson, Jesse Ventura, and the Ron Paul Rally

Nick Gillespie | September 3, 2008

reason.tv attended yesterday's Rally for the Republic and caught up with the master of ceremonies, MSNBC's Tucker Carlson, to discuss the appeal and limitations of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) as a movement leader.

Comments

|9.3.08 @ 12:58PM|#

he left?? huh? i know carlson not a 9/11 truther, neither am i really but c'mon tucker.

tucker was a ron paul supporter on his show quite a bit, it almost feels like he's trying to back away with his critism here.

|9.3.08 @ 1:09PM|#

Can someone explain to me just Ron Paul is trying to accomplish at this point?

I'd be thrilled to see a "limited government and sound money" coalition come together. I don't know if that's what I'm seeing though. Just what is this rally for then? I'd love to see him endorse Barr. I think that's a real possibility but the clock is ticking.

|9.3.08 @ 1:11PM|#

@Warren: RP did endorse Bob Barr. Where have you been?

♪|9.3.08 @ 1:28PM|#

@Jimcitation needed

|9.3.08 @ 1:38PM|#

I realize that there are far too many Truthers in the Ron Paul movement (I could only stand them long enough to try and get Ron elected so I could go back to ignoring them), but did reason specifically choose to film Ventura's speech knowing that the crazies would be in a frenzy?

I mean really, was there no sane moment at the Rally? This video comes across as a human-zoo, "Look how crazy the Ron Paul people are," kind of piece, which is an overly-broad (if not entirely unjustified) mischaracterization.

|9.3.08 @ 2:03PM|#

Good for Carlson! I would have walked out too. The Truthers have shit all over the movement and made it a laughingstock. By design.

|9.3.08 @ 2:20PM|#

I'm really deeply appalled by the truthers. They remove any patina or credibility from the Paul movement.

I have some friends who are "tepid" truthers, and frankly I want to rip them a new one after watching this.

|9.3.08 @ 2:26PM|#

But, that's what fringe groups do. They are parasites that attach themselves to more successful movements.

You always have to be wary of the Lenora Fulani types. The truthers are just that.

|9.3.08 @ 2:28PM|#

"Parasites", that was the word I was looking for! Thanks Butler.

Contrarian|9.3.08 @ 2:33PM|#

Wow. So 15,000 enthusiastic libertarians and a great speech by Paul hitting every libertarian talking point(the war on drugs, unjust wars, a great discourse on individual liberty and freedom) and we have noncoverage from reason. A yawn and more snotty digs. All your vitriol is directed at people who may not be in the mainstream,but are libertarians. On the other hand your critiques of the socialists(dems) is tepid at best. I think a lot of you guys have man crushes on on the Obamasavior as well.
Who are the dead-enders though? The thousands of Paul supporters at the rally and many thousands more around the nation and world? or the handful of bitter haters on theses message boards and the oh so sophisticated reason staff?
There sure was a lot more activity here before the Paul bashing. Looks like the revolution has left you behind.
Cosmotarians! to the coctailmobile!

|9.3.08 @ 3:03PM|#

right on.

|9.3.08 @ 4:01PM|#

The Troofers nearly drove me insane in my local RP Meetup. I canvassed for him, but nearly everyone in the Meetup was a conspiracy theorist. I carpooled to one event and got 45 minutes of Alex Jones/black helicopter stuff.

It's so sad that a movement as potentially powerful as Ron Paul's is hindered by all the crazies inside it.

(Come to think of it, sounds a lot like the LP as well....)

Nick M|9.3.08 @ 7:26PM|#

Is this "coverage" intended by Reason to be a self-parody?

Jeremy|9.7.08 @ 10:51AM|#

Welcome to a bottom up movement. It's not going to be ready for primetime T.V. I'd rather have 9/11 truthers than the sycophantic knowitalls at the major party conventions any day.

Conspiracy theory is way underrated, anyway... what is politics but conspiracy writ large? Nowadays, the argument against a theory is not that it's wrong based on the facts, but that it's "conspiratorial", and *therefore* wrong. As if any of *us* have the facts to pass judgment one way or another; I admire people who stick to their suspicions instead of being cowed by the beltway wisdom of professional pundits.

Even if it's inconvenient for P.R., I'd rather live in a country in which people dispute facts they disbelieve than just swallow it all. You deal with the truthers the same way you deal with anybody in a movement with a pet agenda: you listen politely, and then you move the meeting along. This is politics, people - it's not going to be cut together like an episode of Big Brother or something for your convenience.