Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Ron Paul 2012?
Last
week, Campaign for Liberty press guy and Ron Paul grandson-in-law
Jesse Benton was driving to a constituent event with his boss and
the subject of 2012 came up.
"He hasn’t closed out the idea of another run," said Benton today. "We have some time to decide whether he runs again, or whether he gets behind somebody else. But we don’t have tons of time. By the middle of 2009, the decision needs to be made."
Benton isn't pushing Paul one way or the other. "I could get behind either decision, but it needs to be made in the next six months or so," he said. "One thing we learned is that those voters in New Hampshire and Iowa expect, to see their candidates early and often." Paul entered the 2008 primaries in January 2007, about 11 months and two weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
I asked about the rumor that former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson might jump into the race (unclear in which party yet). "If he were to decide that he wanted to do that, he’d be a great guy to take the reins. But I don’t think that what Dr. Paul captured was 100 percent transferable to anyone else. I think the Bob Barr campaign assumed that and it didn't pan out."
Would Paul run as a Republican again or as a Libertarian? "We try not to ever deal in absolutes in politics," Benton said carefully. "But he would be very likely to be running as a Republican again." It's not just that "working within the system" gets more exposure for a candidate. It's that several Republican primary states include the caveat that candidates cannot run in their primaries and go third party if they lose. "To be frank, I got tired of the 'third party' question getting asked time after time, and I know that Ron did too."
Paul is almost exactly a year older than John McCain, and turned 73 in August.
|11.14.08 @ 1:24PM|#
The salient point.
Paul is almost exactly a year older than John McCain, and
turned 73 years old in August.
KT|11.14.08 @ 1:36PM|#
Great idea, he got so many votes the first time that he's sure to get many more when he's pushing 80.
the innominate one|11.14.08 @ 1:37PM|#
Paul is almost exactly a year older than John McCain, and
turned 73 years old in August.
But has Paul ever served time in a Turkish prison
Vietnam prisoner of war torture camp?
|11.14.08 @ 1:38PM|#
Well to be fair JsubD, he's a medical doctor who bikes some seven miles every day... not exactly the picture of health of McCain was.. and he surely doesn't have the irrationality and mental slipping McCain did.
|11.14.08 @ 1:38PM|#
I think Gary Johnson is a better idea. Let him and RP work together, and they could have something.
|11.14.08 @ 1:39PM|#
But I don't think that what Dr. Paul captured was 100
[percent] transferable to anyone else.
So less a principled movement and more a cult, then?
BDB|11.14.08 @ 1:42PM|#
"The Angry Optimist | November 14, 2008, 1:39pm | #
So less a principled movement and more a cult, then?"
That is about right.
What do you call a cult of personality led by someone that has...no
personality?
|11.14.08 @ 1:44PM|#
While Ron Paul is a year older than John McCain, Ron Paul is in
much better health. John McCain is has battled cancer. Ron Paul was
an athlete and he still exercises all the time. Here he is
exercising while he was campaigning last year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgiHCvu0h4k
JMR|11.14.08 @ 1:50PM|#
At least Gary Johnson isn't hysterical & stupid about weed smokers...Although in that case & for the creaky-old Republican establishment, sanity on the issue may actually disqualify him.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 1:52PM|#
Listen up, wingnuts! Your fucking deregulation just caused a fucking economic meltdown! So sit down, shut up, and just hope no one notices you and gives you the blame you deserve.
The Democratic Republican|11.14.08 @ 1:52PM|#
RP also has a replacement knee and wears cushioned shoes.
But anyway, the part that really irked me was:
Benton isn't pushing Paul one way or the other. "I could get behind
either decision, but it needs to be made in the next six months or
so," he said. "One thing we learned is that those voters in New
Hampshire and Iowa expect, to see their candidates early and
often."
That, ladies and gentlemen, is the brain trust behind the Paul
machine. We had to blow $25 million (minus what they kept for
themselves...I mean, the Campaign for Liberty) to learn that you
need to visit New Hampshire. Most people probably could have told
him that 5 days of campaigning there (or anywhere) wouldn't get it
done.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 1:55PM|#
"Listen up, wingnuts! Your fucking deregulation just caused a
fucking economic meltdown! So sit down, shut up, and just hope no
one notices you and gives you the blame you deserve."
I'm waiting for you to show where there was massive deregulation in
the past 10 years. Oh wait, there wasn't any, only more
regulation.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 1:58PM|#
No, there wasn't any comparative deregulation in the last 10 years. Most of this goes back to the deregulation 20 or 30 years which caused among other things the S&L meltdown.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 1:58PM|#
In any case, no one's going to vote for an old racist wingnut with weird ideas about monetary economics. Give it up, douchebags.
|11.14.08 @ 2:00PM|#
Indeed, if Jesse had realized that should have spent more than 3 days in New Hampshire in 2007 maybe we wouldn't have had the same results. But that's much too much to ask.
|11.14.08 @ 2:00PM|#
The idea that there's been any significant deregulation or that, in fact, there's been much else than added regulation, is absolutely bonkers. I was in banking (in house and in private practice) and know what the heck I'm talking about. Running around shouting "deregulation" is just ignorant.
|11.14.08 @ 2:00PM|#
A casket with containing Ron Paul propped up in a corner of the Oval Office would probably be a step up from either McCain (R-Loser from AZ) or Obama (President elect from holy shit I'm going to disappoint a lot of people)
|11.14.08 @ 2:00PM|#
We have now arrived at the point where regulation is viewed like
spending.
Just as slowing the growth of spending is a spending "cut", not
implementing new regulations at a sufficiently rapid clip is
"deregulation."
Isn't that about it?
I, Kahn O\'Clast|11.14.08 @ 2:02PM|#
Gary Johnson should start a "Republican Reform" movement now and hammer home the ideas of the Ron Paul Revolution and capture libertarian minded voters, Republicans who still get a stiffy over Goldwater, and the soon to be disappointed Obama supporters from the middle. This could sideline the Palin movement and leave the "Base" (which is, ironically, what Al-Qaeda means)with no where to go but stay home or vote for liberty. Since they will be foaming at the mouth and chomping at the bit for the removal of Obama, they'll vote liberty.
|11.14.08 @ 2:03PM|#
egosumabbas,
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
That is all. Though I like both "concerned observer" and "lefiti"
for their stereotypical lefty moonbat style. It's like Micheal
Moore on crank. More humor for the dollar you can't find
anywhere.
|11.14.08 @ 2:03PM|#
I believe the "is henry actually concerned observer" question has been answered.
Lefiti|11.14.08 @ 2:05PM|#
This is like wondering who will win some obscure board game turnament. Ron Paul is barely a pimple of the political world's ass. Drop him. He's a boring old fuck who doesn't matter.
concerned about concerned|11.14.08 @ 2:05PM|#
"No, there wasn't any comparative deregulation in the last 10
years. Most of this goes back to the deregulation 20 or 30 years
which caused among other things the S&L meltdown."
I see. So, normal, periodic downturns in the business cycle are a
good reason to pass arbitrary rules that only server to sate
anti-intellectual goons like yourself. Excellent.
You should run for the U.S. Senate. You'd win. Hysterical
over-reaction is very popular nowadays.
Scott|11.14.08 @ 2:07PM|#
Ron Paul is taking on the mantle of Harold Stassen in the GOP. Will there be a more serious libertarian Republican by 2012? I hope so.
BDB|11.14.08 @ 2:08PM|#
"Lefiti | November 14, 2008, 2:05pm | #
This is like wondering who will win some obscure board game
turnament. Ron Paul is barely a pimple of the
political world's ass. Drop him. He's a boring old fuck who
doesn't matter."
Much shorter.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:10PM|#
"anti-intellectual moonbats like yourself"
I disagreed with you so that makes me a moonbat? What the fuck
happened to your "free minds" schtick? Oh right, that was just to
throw people off. All you really want is free markets, otherwise
known as the system where a few wealthy fuckers assrape everyone
else.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:11PM|#
I still don't understand why all these libertarians are obseessed with Ron Paul. He's a racist wingnut dickhole who shouldn't be allowed to speak much less run for office.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 2:13PM|#
"Just as slowing the growth of spending is a spending "cut", not
implementing new regulations at a sufficiently rapid clip is
"deregulation."
Isn't that about it?"
I think you nailed it on the head Royal Cola Dean.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:14PM|#
Of ocurse libertarians wet dream is a fantasy world where they get to be the only ones to vote and everyone else has to go along with their bizarroid plans.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:15PM|#
Not implemetning new regulations is deregulation if there's new practices that screw over consumers and investors being invented that aren't regulated.
|11.14.08 @ 2:15PM|#
Why would Ron Paul, a great Ob-Gyn and a principled but wrong-for-America older guy, seriously consider running for president again? What are the insider illuminati feeding him?
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:15PM|#
Hi. I like to bloviate and make no sense. And I hate everything. Why don't you libertarians stop being so libertariany.
|11.14.08 @ 2:17PM|#
Face it, another Paul run would be worthless. A Ron Paul
sponsored, more organized, and more aggressive run would be the
ticket. It's not reasonable to have the front man for small
government be among the oldest candidates ever. Blah blah blah and
etcetera.
Ron Paul could be an old racist wingnut, but the phenom that was
the Ron Paul campaign certainly was not nutty, racist, or silly.
The people who were suddenly spurred on, oh fuck it, it's Friday
afternoon and this comment matters nil.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 2:17PM|#
"Not implemetning new regulations is deregulation if there's new
practices that screw over consumers and investors being invented
that aren't regulated."
BZZZT! Sorry you lose, but thanks for playing.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:17PM|#
Why don't you fucking free market fundamentalist shits stop spoofing me!?
|11.14.08 @ 2:18PM|#
I imagine that RP's run will inspire some future revived GOP candidates run the way goldwaters miserable failure ushered in the ideas that the Reagan era was (loosely) based.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:18PM|#
Hi, I like to ban things before they even exist. If I don't, it's deregulation.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:20PM|#
You guys need to give up this cult of Ron Paul. Barack Obama, on the other hand, is a all-knowing leader who will save the world.
|11.14.08 @ 2:21PM|#
By all accounts Dr. Paul is in great health and even something
of an exercise nut. I see no reason why he *couldn't* run again in
2012 if he's still in good shape.
However, I'm not so sure if he should. I don't think it would be
good for his goal of building up something bigger than, and that
outlasts, himself. I'd rather see him out campaigning for Gary
Johnson, easily both the strongest, most mainstream, and most
libertarian Ron Paul Republican. If McCain doesn't run for
re-election in 2010, there's a change Johnson might run for and get
elected to the Senate. If that happens I think there's be no doubt
that he would be the rallying point for the libertarian wing of the
party going into 2012.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:22PM|#
The government needs to step in to stop people from spoofing other people on the internet.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:23PM|#
Seriously, stop spoofing me, or I'll write a very angry comment telling you how angry I am.
|11.14.08 @ 2:23PM|#
So few pro Ron Paul comments. Congratulations to Reason Magazine for alienating half the libertarians out there in the past year from reading your magazine. Movement was getting too big and too organized. Excellent job of putting helping to put a stop to that! 2012 is another opportunity.....you can turn that half of libertarians into zero readers.
|11.14.08 @ 2:24PM|#
I'd just like to give mad props to whoever is fucking with concerned observer right now. Well done. Laughing at douchebags is fun.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:24PM|#
Stop spoofing me! This why no one cares about you free market fundamentalists! Fuck!
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:27PM|#
You piece of shit free market fundamentalists are a pimple on the ass of the world. Dumb fucking shits. Keep spoofing me, fools! See what happens!
Will|11.14.08 @ 2:27PM|#
I love how you guys act like Paul's campaign was an absolute failure... when its arguably done more and awaken and inspired more people to the concept of liberty than reason, Cato, and the like have in decades.
|11.14.08 @ 2:28PM|#
Dude, I heard Ron Paul had a Big Mac for lunch today.
Time to get over this guy.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 2:28PM|#
Concerned, instead of flailing about, just admit you wrote all those previous comments. Also, there's medication available to treat anxiety and paranoia.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:29PM|#
Just you wait! My mommy's gonna talk to your mommy and you'll be in big trouble!
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:30PM|#
Gee, look at all the spoofs of me. I guess that shows how much time you fucktards have on your hands. I'm surprised you were able to type this much while simultaneously jerking off to the picture.
KyleG|11.14.08 @ 2:30PM|#
I'd like to see Ron Paul get behind someone for 2012. Gary Johnson seems like a solid candidate for bringing small government ideas and actions into the GOP. I'm just not convinced Republicans will ever go for it. After going to the county convention this year, however, I am convinced of how utterly corrupt party politics are. Hopefully they can get the campaign going sooner and continue to build on what Paul started.
|11.14.08 @ 2:31PM|#
concerned observer, I'm only saying this because I care: there are a lot of decaffeinated brands on the market today that are just as tasty as the real thing.
|11.14.08 @ 2:32PM|#
when Will says "arguably", he doesn't mean it in that
traditional, scientifc sense of "reasonable minds might disagree
but here are some facts"...oh no no no, he means "I'm willing to
argue it sans evidence."
The Earth is arguably 6,000 years old...if you're a
moron.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:32PM|#
Of ocurse, they say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:33PM|#
"None of the above comments were mine, you fucking
assholes"
Actually, the one where I pointed out how sad it is that they have
this much time to spoof me is real.
|11.14.08 @ 2:34PM|#
just out of curiosity, how ARE commenters here able to post without their names being a "link" to their e-mail addresses?
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:34PM|#
And to the guy posting under my name "None of the above comments were mine": Go fuck yourself.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:35PM|#
The above comment isn't mine and is one of you fucking asshole losers. I know you little assholes wish you were like me, but you're not!
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:35PM|#
@AO-it's really quite easy. Just don't enter an email address before posting.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:36PM|#
The guy posting under my name that told me to "go fuck myself" should go fuck himself.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:36PM|#
Okay, the first 2:35 post is not mine. And you are getting seriously annoying.
The Angry Optimist|11.14.08 @ 2:37PM|#
As sadly childish as this all is, it's cracking me the hell up.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:37PM|#
While I'm flattered that someone else really wants people to think he's me, it's not true. Maybe, one day, if you stay in school and eat your vegetables, you can be like me.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 2:39PM|#
Concerned, I wish you would stop talking to yourself, it's starting to scare me.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:41PM|#
@egosumabbas-I know I just can't help myself. I just love the sound of my own voice.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:41PM|#
Okay, the following posts were mine. All others were people
fake-posting as me.
1:52
1:58
2:10
2:11
2:14
2:15
2:30
2:32
2:33
2:37
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:41PM|#
Alright, I don't even see why I bother doing this anymore. All of you, please bend over as far as you can and thrust your heads up your collective assholes.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:42PM|#
Neither of those 2:41 posts are me. Stop spoofing me, assholes!
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:43PM|#
so there's this eskimo, right? and one day his snowmobile stops running so he takes it into the mechanic. mechanic takes a look at it and says "well here's your problem, it looks like you blew a seal!" eskimo goes "whoa no no i swear that's just frost on my mustache!"
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:43PM|#
The 2:41 post was somebody fake-posting as me, and yet they inadvertently made a good point.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:45PM|#
Alright fuckholes this is the real concerned observer. And all of you are childish little fucks, especially the queefbaits posting as me.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:45PM|#
Since someone seems intent on ruining me handle, I'll just have to get a new handle. All you people who have so much time to spoof me can have fun. Just remember to wash your hands after jerking.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 2:45PM|#
It's probably the fucking Joker who's doing this. And I have a strong suspicion that Episiarch is the Joker.
queefbait (formerly concerned |11.14.08 @ 2:47PM|#
This is my new handle. I'm so awesome you guys can't stand it!
|11.14.08 @ 2:47PM|#
See, I told you Obama is the righteous one. A bunch of people believe it so it has to be true.
troll|11.14.08 @ 2:48PM|#
Clearly, concerned observer, it is far more fun to troll a troll than to try to be constructive. You should feel honored, as my trolling efforts never got me such fame and glory.
|11.14.08 @ 2:49PM|#
And I have a strong suspicion that Episiarch is the
Joker
Suspect away. It's not like you can find out.
|11.14.08 @ 2:49PM|#
This is beautiful. Can the government somehow subsidize CO-spoofing? 'Cause I want to see more of it, even at the cost of market distortion.
Harry (formerly concerned obse|11.14.08 @ 2:49PM|#
Very funny, queefbait. Just drop the (formerly concerned observer) and you have an appropriate handle.
|11.14.08 @ 2:50PM|#
Epi,
Some people call me the space cowboy,yeah
Some call me the gangster of love
Some people call me Maurice
Cause I speak of the pompitus of love.
People talk about me, baby
Say I'm doin' you wrong, doin' you wrong
Well, don't you worry baby
Don't worry Cause I'm right here, right here, right here,
right here at home
Cause I'm a picker
I'm a grinner
I'm a lover
And I'm a sinner
I play my music in the sun.
I'm a joker
I'm a smoker
I'm a midnight toker
I get my loving on the run Wooo Woooo
Harry|11.14.08 @ 2:50PM|#
In any case, I expect Episiarch to start fake-posting under this new handle any minute.
The Angry Optimist|11.14.08 @ 2:51PM|#
I haven't laughed this hard all week.
Jake - I'm more than willing to voluntarily contribute to someone
for this. I'll check that little box on my tax return that says
"YES, I want to donate to CO-trolling!"
|11.14.08 @ 2:52PM|#
In any case, I expect Episiarch to start fake-posting under
this new handle any minute.
If I'm posting here, can I be posting there? Am I that good?
economist|11.14.08 @ 2:54PM|#
To tell you the truth, though, I sometimes suspected that the real CO was always a spoof of the leftwing posters here.
|11.14.08 @ 2:55PM|#
I typically post under other people's handles regardless of how fun it is, or if it is even noticed. joe is probably the trickiest to pull off, can't quite get the right flavor of righteous indignation.
|11.14.08 @ 2:55PM|#
RE: The suggestion of Palin in connection with Ron Paul
The only name possibly more repugnant than "Bob Barr" to the
majority of Ron Paul supporters is the name "Sarah Palin."
Ron Paul's IQ is, oh, let's say, about 180.
Palin's IQ is, oh, let's say, about 80.
Ron Paul is a humble man with principles, integrity and soul.
Palin is a confused, flip-flopping, uninformed attention-seeker
desperately seeking her 15 minutes of fame.
Drop it. It's an insult to our intelligence as well as Ron
Paul's.
economist|11.14.08 @ 2:55PM|#
Epi,
You should know that while CO considers us deluded and irrelevant,
he simultaneously believes us to have godlike powers.
|11.14.08 @ 2:56PM|#
Interesting thread. I suspect that Edward will not be able to hide his identity for long, regardless of what he calls himself.
|11.14.08 @ 2:57PM|#
Oh, and by the way, I'm not doing any of the spoofing in this
thread.
Or am I?!
Nah, just kidding. I'm not spoofing.
Or am I?!
|11.14.08 @ 2:58PM|#
economist,
I tried to explain cognitive dissonance to him the other day to no
avail. And I even once taught a cat to crochet!
|11.14.08 @ 2:59PM|#
"But I don't think that what Dr. Paul captured was 100 [percent]
transferable to anyone else.
So less a principled movement and more a cult, then?"
I'm sick of seeing that 'personality cult' statement. It's a
'standing by the principles of liberty in the face of actually
holding power' cult. Ron Paul has that quality. I'm willing to look
into that governor if Ron Paul doesn't run, but only Ron Paul can
capture lightning in a bottle because only Ron Paul has Ron Paul's
record.
Anyone and everyone else is encouraged to recreate a similar record
for themselves, at which point we will be equally excited about
them.
|11.14.08 @ 2:59PM|#
I AM EDWARD! I JUST WANTED SOMEONE TO ARGUE WITH WHO SOUNDED TOO STUPID TO RESPOND!
economist|11.14.08 @ 3:00PM|#
CO,
I'm sorry, if that's the best you can do on spoofing me, you should
give it up.
economist|11.14.08 @ 3:01PM|#
CO's easy to spoof. Just imagine how you would think if your parents had dropped you on your head repeatedly as a child.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 3:02PM|#
Tak e your market fundie wingnu ttery and smeer it all over your faeces, pussyfaces!
|11.14.08 @ 3:03PM|#
Proven right again! Go fuck yourself Episiarch.
I'd prefer to continue fucking you. Over.
|11.14.08 @ 3:04PM|#
Most of this goes back to the deregulation 20 or 30 years
which caused among other things the S&L meltdown.
What's your next guess?
I seem to recall that the S&Ls all had to buy their deposit
insurance from the same entity (FSLIC), which was a government
agency that didn't have any particular need to protect itself,
since the taxpayers were on the hook if they fucked up.
By removing the normal mechanism of risk management that a private
insurance provider would perform, the failure of the S&Ls was a
foregone conclusion.
-jcr
the innominate one|11.14.08 @ 3:04PM|#
excellent tribute to my lord the URKOBOLD, troll of trolls, gentlemen
miche|11.14.08 @ 3:04PM|#
Stick it up your market-worshiping assholes, jizwads.
Eureka! Now I understand CO's isuckcock@yahoo.com email addy.
|11.14.08 @ 3:06PM|#
There's definitely soemthing to be said for leaving forums so unmoderated that you can spoof eachother willy-nilly. Nowhere but a libertarian forum could one acheive this level of hilarity.
|11.14.08 @ 3:09PM|#
In any case, no one's going to vote for an old racist
wingnut
A racist who wants to free the hundreds of thousands of black men
unjustly held as prisoners of the War on Drugs?
with weird ideas about monetary economics.
Weird ideas like "if you inflate the money by a trillion bucks
every time some banks fuck up, you damage the economy"?
Try again, troll.
-jcr
Orange Line Special|11.14.08 @ 3:10PM|#
No one dares to spoof me, because my crusade to make Democrat
politicians look stupid keeps the MexicanGovernment and its
IllegalSpies in check.
Did you
know I have a blog?
economist|11.14.08 @ 3:11PM|#
Hazel Meade,
Yeah, but it gets confusing after a while. For example, how do you
know when to call bullshit on Edward/Lefiti/CO/FM and when to leave
it alone because it's a spoof?
The Angry Optimist|11.14.08 @ 3:11PM|#
A racist who wants to free the hundreds of thousands of
black men unjustly held as prisoners of the War on
Drugs?
A principled libertarian can still be a racist, JCR, just not a
statist racist.
|11.14.08 @ 3:12PM|#
Nowhere but a libertarian forum could one acheive this level
of hilarity.
Nowhere else but a libertarian forum would tolerate his lack-wit,
content-free insultgasms. The ban hammer would have landed on his
useless ass long ago.
This is an example of the free market of ideas. He's wasted so many
people's time, it's become a form of fraud and this is the market
expelling a bad actor.
queefbait (formerly concerned |11.14.08 @ 3:13PM|#
We need more government intervention into our lives.
Vote Mussolini in 2012!!!
the innominate one|11.14.08 @ 3:13PM|#
TAO - needless to say, but I'll say (write?) it anyway, a racist with state power but unwilling to use that power in a racist way, and even to make policies that would benefit everyone, including minorities, would be far preferable to the status quo.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 3:14PM|#
Sugarfree,
Yeah, well, you like to eat poop! Yeah! I'll bet that makes you
really angry!
betreffenden Beobachter|11.14.08 @ 3:14PM|#
Reinhören up, wingnuts! Ihr fucking Liberalisierung nur zu einer wirtschaftlichen fucking Kernschmelze! Also sitzen, den Mund halten, und hoffe nur, nicht ein Bekanntmachungen Sie und gibt Ihnen die Schuld Sie verdienen.
BDB|11.14.08 @ 3:14PM|#
He said he was going to subpoena Reason for my IP address and
then sue me in court for libel.
This from the guy that is such a pussy he has to beg other people
to ask ToughQuestions to politicians for him.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 3:15PM|#
Poor concerned observer. Well, he can always go back to posting as lefiti. It's unfortunate that he's so easy to spoof.
|11.14.08 @ 3:15PM|#
Hazel, i find it surprising that people generally don't spoof, commentary is usually intelligent, and the comments actually have some content. that said, this thread is a good release from all that good behavior.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 3:16PM|#
Vote Mussolini in 2012!!!
Very funny, Joker. This is why you libertarians are so ignored. You
don't even want the trains to run on time!
betreffenden Beobachter|11.14.08 @ 3:17PM|#
Übersetzung:
Listen, wingnuts! His only goddamn economic liberalization to the
merger of shit! Thus seated, silent and just hope we do not notice
and gives you a fault that you deserve.
BDB|11.14.08 @ 3:18PM|#
I found it more funny. He actually thinks we have British-like
speech codes here.
Besides, you libel is something that damages ones reputation in a
given community. LoneWacko's reputation is ALREADY ridiculously low
in H&R.
egosumabbas|11.14.08 @ 3:19PM|#
Why does everything sound so statist and angry in German?
(oh, and Google chrome apparently things that statist is not a
word. A little too convenient.)
|11.14.08 @ 3:20PM|#
I daresay that Lonewacko falls higher on the Hit & Run social scale than Edward. Lonewacko is just a little crazy, not psychotic.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 3:21PM|#
Mussolini wasn't that bad, if I had to choose between the
Constitution and the train not being five minutes late, I would
always go with the latter.
Libertarians are so fucking stupid, it's been proven that
government has always known better than business how meet peoples
need for shoes, clothing, and food. Look at the USSR, the
government did a bang up job there...
You know, minus the famines and long lines.
The Angry Optimist|11.14.08 @ 3:24PM|#
PL - I dunno...even though CO's tenor is crazier than The LoneWacko, I would say that posting here year after year, with the goal of getting people to read your blog that they clearly don't care about it approaching "psychosis".
betreffenden Beobachter|11.14.08 @ 3:25PM|#
Wingnuts hear! Dirt for the merger of its economic liberalization Shit! For example, sitting quietly and we have not noticed, and I hope to make a mistake, that is capable of.
|11.14.08 @ 3:27PM|#
The Angry Optimist,
But there's more to Lonewacko than anger and a desire to insult
libertarians. He wants to do constructive things. Like build a big
wall and stuff.
egosumabbas,
Statist gets a red underline in Firefox, too. Interesting.
Bob|11.14.08 @ 3:29PM|#
Well, I certainly am glad that I checked the comments for some
informed, well-thought-out, and didactic responses. I am truly
among giants.
(Though I think I may have peed a little bit from the fits of
laughter).
betreffenden Beobachter|11.14.08 @ 3:36PM|#
Wingnuts hear! Black for a merger of economic liberalization hell! For example, sit silently and we have not noticed, and I hope I make a mistake, can be.
|11.14.08 @ 3:37PM|#
Bob,
Don't worry about it. Tessie Hutchinson's
hometown was a nice enough place the other 363 days of the
year; you just caught us on a busy day.
|11.14.08 @ 3:42PM|#
I'm suing you too Bob! Right after I get back from drinking from President Elect Obamas ass with a bendy straw!
|11.14.08 @ 3:43PM|#
Why shouldn't he run? Look at the massive profits he made from the last run. He intentionally ran a very low budget campaign while promising donors a serious run, ran up massive surpluses in the campaign which were never spent on an actual campaign and then announces he is transferring the funds to other ventures similar to the ones he previously used to supply funds to his own family members via salaries. In one case those salaries for being staff on the newsletter that contained the racist material th at got him into trouble but Paul said he never knew the material was being published -- which raised the question as to what his family members, on the payroll of the publishing arm, were actually doing for the money they got. Either they worked there and saw the material and didn't tell Paul about it or they din't work there, didn't see the material, but got salaries anyway.
|11.14.08 @ 3:49PM|#
But we don't have tons of time. By the middle of 2009, the
decision needs to be made.
Sweet! Six months of post-election "analysis" and straight into
"Campaign 2012".
*puts head through noose, kicks chair over*
|11.14.08 @ 4:00PM|#
You don't even want the trains to run on time!
Mussolini didn't get the trains running on time. He just made it
illegal to report otherwise.
-jcr
|11.14.08 @ 4:02PM|#
Paul's age won't really be a factor if his health doesn't deteriorate. I saw him in New Hampshire bound up on to a stage in a move that required a level of athleticism that I honestly doubt ANY Presidential candidate except maybe Gerald Ford (and he probably would have muffed the landing) could have demonstrated. Paul's wife couldn't even get up there with the assistance of four people. Whether his mind holds up, and whether he has any desire to be the actual candidate (I've always got the impression he gets off more on the movement itself than being the focal point) is another issue. But in terms of health and age, Ron Paul is the Jack LaLanne of politics.
queefbait (formerly concerned |11.14.08 @ 4:11PM|#
If you haven't noticed, fuck is my favorite word. I'll bet right now you're asking yourself. "Why is a 15 year old Obama supporter who's closest resemblance to a sexual encounter has been his long term romance with Palmeta and her five sisters?" Well, as my shrink has informed me, I have a form of sexually related OCD, which spurs mostly from my self doubt in my adequacy, as I have never been once approached by a man or a woman, though my family beagle did offer a pity fuck once.
queefbait (formerly concerned |11.14.08 @ 4:14PM|#
Oh for fucks sake, the stress this is causing me has gotten me so flustered I'm losing the ability to convey myself properly. Please excuse me while I relieve some tension. I'll be back in a few.
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 4:27PM|#
BRFANGLE...SPAGWANTOOD...SKRFL...BLAAAAWTOD!!!!
MARKLBEFUGWADTANJISTARF!!
QUENTODAGUNKLE!
The Angry Optimist|11.14.08 @ 4:29PM|#
Ron Paul's IQ is, oh, let's say, about 180.
my fucking right eye it is.
any minute now, someone's going to come along and say how high
LRC's numbers are and how low "tReason's" are.
|11.14.08 @ 4:34PM|#
The Angry Optimist | November 14, 2008, 4:29pm | #
Ron Paul's IQ is, oh, let's say, about 180.
my fucking right eye it is.
any minute now, someone's going to come along and say how high
LRC's numbers are and how low "Reason's"(typo corrected)
are.
This sounds like the troubled sputterings of of man who has just
watched a porno with his girlfriend. "Really baby its all just
camera tricks...its really not that big"!
concerned observer|11.14.08 @ 4:42PM|#
Here in Canada, I let the bull moose in the woods fuck me in the ass.
Lefiti|11.14.08 @ 6:00PM|#
Ron Paul is a race-baiting cocksucker who believes the founding fathers wanted to establish a theocracy. That's your big libertarian hero?
|11.14.08 @ 6:07PM|#
Please Dr. Paul, consider a professional campaign team. You are
a fantastic candidate with a wonderful message and amazing
grassroots support. Unfortunately, your campaign staff did not
measure up.
This time, run to WIN!
Gunner Sykes|11.14.08 @ 6:30PM|#
Lefiti is a joke, right? Please don't tell me that there are
actually people that bereft of sense.
I don't think I could bear it.
Lefiti |11.14.08 @ 6:33PM|#
Ron Paul can go to hell, we must remember that America was built on one freedom, that freedom was servitude to government.
|11.14.08 @ 6:46PM|#
I agree that he wouldneed a top-notch management team... definately not the folks that tried to run C4L so far!
|11.14.08 @ 7:05PM|#
Even if he ran as an Independent or Libertarian, Ron Paul would
run into the same problems that any other "third" candidate will
inevitably encounter. And no, not just money or debate access. The
real obstacle is much more systemic. This guy actually tackles it
pretty well:
Why Third Parties Lose (And How They Can Win)
|11.14.08 @ 8:52PM|#
What a sad lot, the Paul is a racists crowd. Presumably they are the ones who were instead McCain supporters, hanging out signs in Idaho offering Free Public Executions for Obama, and whose children were singing Assassinate Obama songs on their school buss last week. Jeez, and to think "libertarians" are supposed to be "smarter" than the average idiot. Do you not realize how skillfully you were manipulated? Do you not realize who was the editor of those newsletters at the time those comments were written? Hint, Rockwell, Cato and Kirchick all wouldn't want his name revealed.
The Angry Optimist|11.14.08 @ 9:18PM|#
Seth, since we're all so dumb, maybe you would care to enlighten us.
Marc Scott Emery|11.14.08 @ 9:31PM|#
Ron Paul will be 77 years old by the next Presidential election.
Consider researching the outstanding two-term Governor of New
Mexico, Gary Johnson, for Republican nominee in 2012. I have met
Governor Gary Johnson and he would get the full support of millions
of Americans in the drug-law reform movement. Mr. Johnson has
unassailable integrity, huge intelligence, a great mind, a thorough
understanding of the US Constitution, great principles of limited
government. He is articulate, sincere and accessible. Indeed, I
welcome the news of Mr. Johnson's candidacy. He is just the
revitalization the Republican leadership requires.
To add your support for the GARY JOHNSON in 2012 campaign, go
here
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=38552147212&ref=nf
Johnson will need to start the dinner & speaking circuit now to
develop a leadership role by the next mid-term (2010) election. Our
support now may be influential. Calling all Ron Paul Republicans,
libertarians, conservatives: let Gary Johnson know you would
support his bid to test the waters for a 2012 bid.
|11.14.08 @ 9:54PM|#
Seriously, my constant repetitive references to words like
"assrape" and "dickhole" have no Freudian meaning.
No, seriously. I'm butch.
Hacha Cha|11.14.08 @ 10:37PM|#
that is such a lame excuse, if he can't run in a handful of states because of election laws, he could always switch to the VP on the ticket in those states. it is only a handful, maybe 8 or 9 states I think that won't let you run in the primaries and lose and run as a third party in the general election. terrible excuse, better to run in November in 40 states as the presidential candidate and the VP in 8 or 9 states than to not run at all. he would break Ed Clarke's record in 2012 if he can get the same momentum and the same or better in contributions and run or be drafted as the libertarian nominee.
Bags|11.14.08 @ 11:10PM|#
What a sad lot, the Paul is a racists crowd. Presumably they
are the ones who were instead McCain supporters, hanging out signs
in Idaho offering Free Public Executions for Obama, and whose
children were singing Assassinate Obama songs on their school buss
last week.
What the fuck are you even talking about?
|11.15.08 @ 12:47AM|#
Palin/Paul!? If you even know who Ron Paul is, you would know
that it is a ludicrous idea that he would consider running under a
hot version of George W Bush!
But Paul, (NOT PALIN!) should be the future of the Republican
party. Free Market, Anti-interventionist foreign policy, and strict
Constitutional interpretation would solve nearly all of America's
many problems!
|11.15.08 @ 2:02AM|#
Great news! He will have a lot of momentum and name recognition
already, unlike in January 2007. Also, he would have a professional
team and money much earlier to be active, plus another book that is
coming out this or next year. His support is already much more than
what he received during the primaries. Some of them probably voted
for Obama or Palin as the lesser of two evils, and will vote for
Paul in a heartbeat. Indeed, Paul will have a good professional
team next time.
Other than in 2008, Dr. Paul would have a realistic chance at
winning the primary, so f... to those "journalists" that want to
ask him the third party option.
By 2012 Obama will probably still be busy in Iraq and Afghanistan
in any case (and another country, Iran, Syria?) and the economy in
a recession with all the inflation and the USD worth a lot less
than now. Paul will be the peace candidate and civil libertarian
and Obama the warmonger.
If the GOP does not appoint him in a senior position, Paul could
run for senator in Kay B Hutchison's place (she wants to be
governor) and be a senator from 2010.
To those who think Paul would be too old to run in 2012, look at 84
year old sen. Frank Lautenberg, that just got re-elected with a
strong majority in NJ and he will be 90 when he completes his term.
Here are some pics, he still looks very active and Dr. Paul is more
than 10 years younger than him. There are also several congressmen
in their late seventies or in their eighties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Lautenberg
http://www.senate.gov/~budget/democratic/Photos/Lautenberg.jpg
Dr. Paul carried the minority and youth vote in the GOP primaries
(e.g. vote the GOP needs to win) and he should be easily able to
get the older and middle class vote then.
Also, Johnson could be a perfect VP pick and can campaign with Paul
(e.g. not only Barry Goldwater Jr) plus various others. IMHO Sarah
Steelman can run in 2010 for the senate position of Kit Bond in
Missouri. She received almost 50% in the GOP gov. primary this
year, so she can easily beat him (Bond) in a primary should he
decide to run again. She could also be a great campaigner or even a
VP pick, to Paul or Johnson. She has a Masters degree in economics,
lectured as associate prof., served as state senator, is thus
experienced and smart and very gorgeous. Alternatively, if Dr. Paul
does not run, and endorsed and campaign say Gary Johnson, he could
be easily Johnson's VP.
|11.15.08 @ 2:27AM|#
It's amazing how much more well written the spoofs of CO are than his actual posts.
Craig|11.15.08 @ 2:55AM|#
What do you call a cult of personality led by someone that
has...no personality?
You call it a revolution of ideas, led by someone who has proven
his worthiness as its leader by a lifetime of virtue and spurning
the temptations of power.
|11.15.08 @ 8:26AM|#
"What do you call a cult of personality led by someone that
has...no personality?"
Ummm...Obama 2008?
I love Ron Paul. He's the only guy that's made any sense in the
last year or two. He'd be a great president, but it will never
happen due to the lack of intelligence and knowledge of the average
Obamanoid and/or neocon.
Change? Yeah...give us all your money and you can have the change.
See you in the bread lines!
|11.15.08 @ 9:40AM|#
I am embaressed by the coments on this page. Dr. Paul is the only honest politician - I hope he runs in 2012. If he choses not to than I would be interested in who endorses.
VM|11.15.08 @ 10:07AM|#
*falls out of chair*
"honest politician"...
that's rich.
the d00d's a part time circus freak with an idea that occasionally
fits with libertarianism, but the constitution party is where he
belongs. the LP is too messed up already!
|11.15.08 @ 12:53PM|#
Marc
Holy shit, you ain't kidding. Look at this about Gary Johnson,
libertarians you guys would be nuts not to back this guy's
run...
"Johnson was elected as a Republican during a time when New
Mexico's party registration was 2-1 Democrat. He ran both his
initial campaign and his re-election campaign as "100% positive,"
never mentioning his opponent once. Under Johnson's administration,
New Mexico experienced the longest period without a tax-increase in
the state's entire history (8 years)[1].
He cut the rate of government growth in half, left the New Mexico
state government with a budget surplus and 1000 fewer employees
(without firing anyone), privatized half of the prisons in the
state, brought a state-wide school voucher system to New Mexico,
shot down campaign finance reform in his state, and vetoed 750
bills (more than all the vetoes of the other 49 Governors in the
country at that time, combined) with only 2 overrides, earning him
the nickname Gary "Veto" Johnson. He opposes the War on Drugs, he
opposed the Iraq War from the start, and was the only Republican
Governor in 2000 to not endorse George W. Bush for President."
|11.15.08 @ 12:55PM|#
I liked Ron Paul. You have to admit that he generated a great
deal of enthusiasm, and among youth too.
But this Gary Johnson guy, from what I've read so far, that guy
would get my vote in a fricking hearbeat over Obama.
Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|11.15.08 @ 12:57PM|#
Paul would be better off running for Flake / Sanford / Johnson and campaigning to be their Treasury Secretary.
The Angry Optimist|11.15.08 @ 1:06PM|#
I am embaressed by the coments on this page.
Me too! Just look at all the cult-worship going on around
here:
1.Dr. Paul is the only honest politician
2.He'd be a great president, but it will never happen due to the
lack of intelligence and knowledge of the average Obamanoid and/or
neocon.
3.Ron Paul's IQ is, oh, let's say, about 180.
4. only Ron Paul can capture lightning in a bottle because only Ron
Paul has Ron Paul's record.
And enough with the "Dr. Paul" stuff (no doubt said in the moony,
doe-eyed voice of a teenage girl talking about Zac Efron). Did you
call him "Dr. Frist"? How about "Dr. Weldon"?
Ron Paul has no record. Instead of working at the
margins and making goverment more libertarian (or
Constitutional),he just introduces sweeping legislation guaranteed
not to pass and votes "no" on everything else.
Which did more for liberty: Bob Barr's work in sunset clauses in
the PATRIOT ACT and Dick Armey's work to ensure judicial oversight
into Carnivore...or RP's "symbolic" no vote?
|11.15.08 @ 1:48PM|#
The Angry Optimist: LOL You must be kidding, Paul no record. All
the legislation he introduces is libertarian fyi! He is principled
as well as pragmatic in how to attain those ideals. He managed to
get four different third parties to sign a four-point plan that is
basically libertarian.
You fail to say Barr regretted his vote and that Patriot Act 2 has
been adopted, on a permanent basis. Thus is sunset clauses is also
something of the past.
Of course he is not the only honest politician, but there are
rather few of them. He is a medical doctor, thus the use of the
term Dr. is justified.
the innominate one|11.15.08 @ 1:56PM|#
I'd like to see Johnson/ Flake
or Johnson/ Richardson! an all NM ticket is the ticket!
The Angry Optimist|11.15.08 @ 2:17PM|#
All the legislation he introduces is libertarian
fyi!
Oh please. The "Sanctity of Life Act 2007" wanted to not only make
"Life at conception" the official position of the federal
government, but it also moved to deny SCOTUS the power to review
cases arising out of state laws that would limit or ban
abortion.
|11.15.08 @ 2:19PM|#
Why is it that any hint of empowering Ron Paul brings out the
most obsessive disruptive leftist trolls? Very annoying.
http://wonkette.com/404320/its-truck-nutz-vs-paultards-in-gop-fixin-ideas-contest
http://wonkette.com/404306/how-can-you-help-rebuild-the-republican-party
http://ideas.rebuildtheparty.com/pages/general/suggestions/65339
|11.15.08 @ 2:31PM|#
I follow no cult. I seek and follow, when possible, the truth.
The only man who was brave enough to dare speak it was the good
Doctor. None of the other candidates are even knowledgeable enough
to debate him...that's why it never happened! Everyone's pet
issues, like abortion, gay marriage, etc...are state issues. The
federal government has no business intervening on these issues. All
they are supposed to do is enforce the Constitution, protect our
borders and stay out of our lives.
It's amazing to me how most people stay happily mired in their
servitude and blind acceptance of the people that want to control
their lives.
The Angry Optimist|11.15.08 @ 3:02PM|#
I follow no cult. I seek and follow, when possible, the
truth. The only man who was brave enough to dare speak it was the
good Doctor.
This is one of those "the second part of your sentence undermines
the first."
And thanks, VM! I wish RP would just endorse somebody else so the
Cult of RP will die.
|11.15.08 @ 3:07PM|#
If Ron Paul has a cult following, it's certainly not because of
any charisma or soaring oratory. Pure and simple, his long
extremely consistent record blew supporters away. For that reason,
any other candidate will be hard pressed to excite people as RP
did.
I don't see any quick way to build something that outlives RP. In
the long run, get young people elected to office who will vote
consistently as RP did. Bright charismatic people with great
speaking skills would be a plus. Of course, people like that
probably could make a fortune in the business world, so good luck
convincing them to run.
BTW, pot shots by libertarians at RP anger RP's supporters, which
is self defeating for the libertarian cause. This is especially
true for the tiresome disproven racist meme. If you want more
small-L libertarians in office, wouldn't it be better to support
them in general when they vote 99% libertarian, even while you
critique some of their positions? Just saying.
Eric Evans|11.15.08 @ 3:32PM|#
"I still don't understand why all these libertarians are
obseessed with Ron Paul. He's a racist wingnut dickhole who
shouldn't be allowed to speak much less run for office."
It's not the misspelling that gets me, even when the text box
checks spelling... It's this: "shouldn't be allowed to speak." This
is raw totalitarianism at its worst and a blatant appeal to
violation of First Amendment rights. Just because you don't like
the speech doesn't mean it should be restricted you totalitarian
dickhole.
|11.15.08 @ 6:01PM|#
"This is one of those "the second part of your sentence
undermines the first.""
Huh? When I hear the truth from someone and it happens to coincide
with what I've already learned on my own, through research not
conjecture, I know it's for real.
If you haven't noticed, the last several presidents have made the
same empty promises, every four years, and nothing ever changes.
The notion that there is any real difference between the Coke and
Pepsi candidates is a sad testimonial to the level to which 90% of
the population is hopelessly brainwashed.
And here we go again, having word battles with people who offer no
substantive dialog, give no meaningful arguments and are happy with
the sound bytes they are fed by the most superficially accepted
candidate.
This article is about the possibility of Ron Paul running again in
2012. Is that even practical? Maybe not, but if the message remains
the same and all his predictions continue to be correct (do your
own research), he'll have my support again.
The Angry Optimist|11.15.08 @ 7:01PM|#
are happy with the sound bytes they are fed by the most
superficially accepted candidate.
What are you on about? I voted Libertarian this year. I don't give
one whit for either of the Two Big Parties, but Ron Paul apparently
does.
I'm sorry, I just don't have any respect for RP. He's done nothing
in Congress to advance liberty...he introduces bills he knows won't
pass, he inserts pork into bills he know will (but votes against
them anyway), he pandered to the worst elements of Southern Society
for 20+ years and he squandered the energy and the money he raised
this year by continuing to run in a primary where he barely
garnered 5% half the time. He even "endorsed" voting for the Green
Party, even though they are anathema to libertarianism.
His followers are worse. RP endorses Chuck Baldwin and RP's
followers insist (Insist! Even after being told not to!) on writing
him onto ballots where he wasn't even eligible.
|11.15.08 @ 8:29PM|#
"Paul is almost exactly a year older than John McCain, and
turned 73 in August."
And he is in far better condition both physically and mentally. I
would have no problem with his age if he is as sharp as he is today
whether as a politician or a doctor.
John McCain on the other hand will most likely need constant
supervision by a doctor (physical and mental).
derp|11.15.08 @ 10:08PM|#
I'm personally hoping for Jeff Flake, he seems like a good man and he is young.
The Angry Optimist|11.15.08 @ 11:34PM|#
"To be frank, I got tired of the 'third party' question
getting asked time after time, and I know that Ron did
too."
Once you realize the Republican Party doesn't value Paul any more,
you won't be tired of the question. Paul will just do the right
thing.
|11.16.08 @ 2:01AM|#
I dislike Ron Paul. He wants us to return to the 1800s.
The Republicans need to be like Barry Goldwater or they can become
a minority party.
|11.16.08 @ 8:45AM|#
Well, Jesse, not everything about the 1800s was bad. There was a smaller federal government, a president who was a constitutional officer instead of an elected dictator, respect for states' rights, no interventionist wars, and no central bank. I'm not saying it was a golden age or anything -- because it certainly wasn't -- but don't assume everything has moved in some progressive direction and that new is better.
George Dance|11.16.08 @ 9:01AM|#
It's not just that "working within the system" gets more
exposure for a candidate. It's that several Republican primary
states include the caveat that candidates cannot run in their
primaries and go third party if they lose.
That's the third time since the election the Paul campaign has
referred to agreements Paul signed with state GOPs promising not to
run third party; Paul's mentioned it one, and Benton twice.
"To be frank, I got tired of the 'third party' question getting
asked time after time, and I know that Ron did too."
Then why didn't either of them mention those agreements during the
campaign? That would have put a stop to that question. Whereas not
talking about them just gives rise to further questions:
http://www.nolanchart.com/article5467.html
|11.16.08 @ 9:42AM|#
Jim Bob
Are you constitutionally incapable of making an argument? What is
your major at that Christian "college", advanced Young Earth
Creationism?
Seriously, I haven't seen one argument from you other than to
accuse me of not making one.
My argument was that the South is more theocratic (which I defined
above as policy substantially informed by religious concerns) and
racist than other regions. To support my argument about theocracy I
pointed to the stricter sodomy laws in the South, opposition to
homosexuality in general, the stricter state of laws on medical
marijuana, the higher levels of opposition to pornography, all
demonstrated either by listing of policy/statute differences or
poll numbers. As to the racist argument I point to historical facts
(slavery, Jim Crow) as well as contemporary statistics (the low
number of white votes for Obama in the South compared to the rest
of the nation, the out of porportion number of hate groups in the
South, the disparate impact and racial origins of felon
disenfranchisement laws [and Max, you consistently miss the point
that even if you are right about Manza/Uggen's classification of
Florida law that this does not disprove the statistically
significant GENERAL TREND they found], etc.). You see, that is an
argument. I define what I mean, what I would expect to find, and
then I give evidence and cites for that evidence so others can
evaluate it.
The closest thing to an argument I've seen from you is "I go to
school in the south and they are real nice and like black people at
the school."
"You were a dick and a coward then; you're a dick and a coward
now."
I think I've asked this before, what Christian college do you go to
with that potty-mouth? I mean really, why not give your name and
your college, I'm sure they'd love to know how you "argue" here
with confused profanity laced insults to anyone who disses your
favorite tribe. Or are you too much of a "dick and coward" to
identify yourself and your school? Maybe we can stop this silly
false machismo thing now.
People post under a variety of handles for a variety of reasons
here, because what is supposed to matter is the free exchange of
ideas and arguments. We're not here to make email buddies but
because we enjoy political discussion. Try it.
I'll make it easy on you. I've listed for you in plain numbers the
posts where I give the evidence and arguments I make. If you think
I'm wrong, then address them. If not, then shut the fuck up and
take your spanking like a man. They do paddle at that Christian
school of yours don't they (Proverbs 13:24?)?
|11.16.08 @ 9:59AM|#
TAO
Is your beef with Ron Paul as a political actor, or is it rather
with the cult of personality around him and perhaps his failure to
do more to get the movement past him? I can kind of see your point.
Paul's non-endorsement of Barr was a bit problemmatic there. But
then, didn't some of that have to do with Barr?
Jon B|11.16.08 @ 2:33PM|#
Come on Jesse... he's a doctor and a congressman. You don't hear
John McCain's press staffers calling him "John" to the press. He
should be called "Congressman Paul" or "Doctor Paul"
even if you're married to his grand daughter.
|11.16.08 @ 2:33PM|#
As for Jindal. No way his great political mentors/backers are
former Governor Foster a good old boy crook and President Bush the
statist!
He basicly has no record at this point.
But he did strongly support the Iraq war from day one. To give a
little hint.
Jindal is form the Bush wing of the Republican party.
He is no Ron Paul or Sarah Palin.
Robert Enders|11.16.08 @ 7:09PM|#
kusterdu,
The Spanish-American War, America's first overseas intervention,
was fought during the 1800's.
cunnivore|11.16.08 @ 8:07PM|#
Of course Ron Paul will run again in 2012. The Campaign for Liberty slush fund won't last more than a couple of years, and you don't expect his family members to have to get real jobs, do you?
cunnivore|11.16.08 @ 8:13PM|#
I thought Jefferson's quasi-war against the Barbary Pirates was
the first US intervention overseas.
And I'm not sure why the invasion of Canada during the War of 1812,
and the invasion of Mexico during the Mexican war are not
considered on a par with intervention overseas. (not to mention the
invasion of the Confederacy during the WBS...threadjack!)
|11.16.08 @ 9:08PM|#
"kusterdu,
The Spanish-American War, America's first overseas intervention,
was fought during the 1800's."
Fair enough, and I knew someone might call me on that, but it
wasn't fought until the very end of the century. As you said, it
"America's first overseas intervention" and a very pointless
war.
|11.16.08 @ 9:09PM|#
Oh, good point cunnivore (except about the Confederacy; let's not turn this into a Civil War discussion, please!)
|11.16.08 @ 9:11PM|#
Anyway, Cunnivore, you're right. While one might argue that the Mexican-American War was not interventionist in that America was fighting within its "sphere of influence" and for the purpose of directly acquiring territory, it was still an unjustifiable imperialistic war.
|11.16.08 @ 9:13PM|#
On the other hand, I didn't say all wars in the 1800s were good, just that they weren't of the "world police" variety.
The Angry Optimist|11.16.08 @ 11:36PM|#
I think "imperialistic" and "empire" are overused to the point of incoherence.
|11.17.08 @ 12:05AM|#
Normally, I would sympathize with you TAO. I hate the similar abuse of words like "fascist" and "racist". However, by "imperialistic", I meant a country wrongfully acquiring land from another country or group by force.
concerned observer|11.17.08 @ 3:33AM|#
no one will vote for this racist agenda of freedom and liberty
|11.17.08 @ 11:47AM|#
Young Jesse and the other sycophants in Paul's deluded circle
will be seriously disappointed -- no, make that devastated -- by
how little interest there will be in a Ron Paul candidacy
again.
Those who worked so hard and contributed so much were burned by
Paul's incompetent campaign, which left the vast majority of them
with the distinct impression that it was nothing more than an Alan
Keyes-like effort to put a bunch of family members and hangers-on
on the payroll.
I should know. I was one of the people that Paul and his group
(successfully) played for fools. Fool me once, shame on you; fool
me twice...well, you know.
|11.17.08 @ 11:54AM|#
RP's semi-success was a result of the Iraq War. If there's another unpopular war going on RP has a shot at doing at least as well as last time. If not, his candidacy will be as marginal as Duncan Hunter's- without a hot issue like the war, there simply isn't that much support within the GOP for someone like him.
Chuck|11.17.08 @ 12:57PM|#
Eric in VA: "While Ron Paul is a year older than John McCain,
Ron Paul is in much better health. John McCain is has battled
cancer. Ron Paul was an athlete and he still exercises all the
time. Here he is exercising while he was campaigning last
year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgiHCvu0h4k"
Ha ha, how much fun was it for you to find that exercising
clip?
"I carry a picture of Ron Paul doing sit-ups in my back pocket
wherever I go. You can almost see up his shorts!" - Eric in VA
|11.17.08 @ 1:03PM|#
There's nothing wrong with a Ron Paul presidential campaign that hyperinflation can't cure.
Matt|11.17.08 @ 2:28PM|#
If this election cycle is any indication, he will run as a Republican if he is interested in the 2012 race. He did not run as an Independent or Libertarian in part because he signed legally binding agreements saying he would not.
Shawn Levasseur|11.17.08 @ 4:30PM|#
It all depends on wether or not he wants to stay in
congress.
When he's ready to leave the House, I think a run on the LP
presidential ticket would be an ideal grand finale to Ron Paul's
political career. Until then, he'll only run under the GOP
banner.
Interesting that the GOP has rules to require a pledge of GOP
primary candidates not to seek another party's nomination, while
the Democrats do not (as seen in Mike Gravel's rather late
conversion to the LP after departing the Democrat's
primaries.)
on a side note: Really? Is all this trolling and counter-trolling
really necessary? It's not even clever trolling.
Sean Scallon|11.17.08 @ 5:44PM|#
The only way if Paul runs if he doesn't see an obvious successor and wants to keep his movement "united" or at least not spinning off into separate and unproductive orbits. Right now such successors would be Gary Johnson or Gov. Sanford of South Carolina. Jesse Ventura is just too mecurial and not someone I would rely on. It will be interesting to see if politicans like Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin style themselves to fit in with the Revolution as well.
|11.17.08 @ 11:15PM|#
THE JEWISH NEW YORK MEDIA WILL AGAIN BE SCARED SHITLESS OF HIM
AND CLOAK HIM AGAIN. HE WON'T EVEN BE ALLOWED TO CHAIR ONE OF THE
TRILLIONS OF JEWISH CHAIRMANSHIPS CURRENTLY HELD IN THE
GOVERNMENT.
AND A JEWISH GUY BEAT HIM OUT OF THE CONTROL OF THE OBAMA WHITE
HOUSE. OBAMA PAID UP "FIRST THING'. HIS STRINGS ARE WELL IN PLACE.
IS THE CHEF REALLY JEWISH TOO?
RON PAUL IS A BIT LIKE ME. YOU CAN CONTROL THE COUNTRY, BUT YOU
CAN'T CONTROL THE MINDS OF THE MORE INTELLIGENT HONEST PEOPLE. ONE
HOPES FOR A GOOD SOLUTION TO THE MONSTER PROBLEM IN AMERICA AND
EUROPE.
|11.18.08 @ 1:43PM|#
If another idiot democrat says that deregulation caused this problem I am just going to explode. Stop perpetuating this lie. This problem was caused by agents in the market and their self delusion, by excessive minority activism, pressuring, and the complicity of both parties in this idealistic social engineering philosophy being imposed on the market. The oversight and regulation was there. Those who were doing it, however, were idiots: The rating agencies, for example. The moral hazards of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac(quasi governmental institutions) and our government and their illicit pal institution, the Federal Reserve simply would not accept the pain of two or three prior recession for political reasons, and instead opted to inflate the money supply and lower interest rates to enable this kind of malinvestment, overspeculation and national indebtedness. This is the cause of our problems. Regulation does not fix the problem when greed erodes away at reason, and stupidity runs your economic philosophies. Europe, right now, is proof of this. They have it bad despite regulation, but not as bad because they are not as stupid. So, let me make this clear. Deregulation did not help, but it is far from the cause of our present economic misery. I have had enough of you liberal idiots talking about deregulation. It was government involvement that created this mess more than anything else. Stop blaming the free market. STOP! That is a scapegoat for answers you can not accept, realities you will not face. Stop trashing capitalism, your doing so only makes you a complete and utter fool, especially in the face of the disaster that is other economic philosophies when analyzed by contrast.
|11.19.08 @ 7:24AM|#
PLEASE RUN AGAIN CONGRESSMAN PAUL!!!
Dr. Paul is still sharp as a tack and should be just fine with
another run. Many older folks stay very viable well into their
nineties. I was amazed at his schedule this year.
But he takes care of himself (it's that Personal Responsibility
thing!) and his cause really energizes him. People who live life
with such purpose (as he does) often seem fairly unhampered by
older age.
AND IF HE RUNS AGAIN, WE'LL TRIPLE HIS SUPPORT---AT A
MINIMUM!!!
|11.19.08 @ 2:12PM|#
I think either Paul or a candidate with the same ideas could definitely pull this off if the republican party doesn't continue steamrolling towards it's demise. In about 18 months it will be painfully evident that Obama will not bring change or positive change. I think the support will be greatly increased. Daily I talk with more and more people who have started to see past the lies and BS given off by the MSM and GOP during the campaign.
concerned observer|11.20.08 @ 2:40PM|#
i changed my mind, i realized that ron pauls idea of regulation, which is to regulate the counterfeiting federal reserve and his opposition to the Gramm/Leach/Bliley repeal of glass/steagal is the right kind of regulation of the economy. a crime-and-punishment style regulation rather than a pay-the-criminals-to-manage-the-economy style that Obama pushes for.
|11.21.08 @ 6:15PM|#
Im not sure Ive ever read more of a cry baby on any forums...is CO sean hannity or neal boortz
observently concerned about co|11.21.08 @ 6:19PM|#
ahaahhhaaaaa
i think hes really pee wee herman
btw CO hows your tin foil ball coming along...you can shove that up
your ass btw
TNC|11.22.08 @ 7:32PM|#
Please take a gander at "Dreams of my Father" by Barack Obama, before claiming Paul is a racist.
Harry Rubin|11.25.08 @ 12:44AM|#
I'd vote for a dead ron paul....one second in office would be good enough for me
|11.27.08 @ 11:17AM|#
The RP campaign team surely made mistakes in 2008, but it was big media that detroyed any hopes of Congressman Paul getting in the White House.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245