Ron Paul: It's Like He's Made of Money

Ron Paul a week ago called on his supporters: raise a fresh half a million before the end of the fundraising quarter (which ended just minutes ago as I write).

He raised the half million in three days, and then upped the ante: a cool million.

According to his web site as of this posting, he handily exceeded that new goal as well, ending up with $1,201,860.52 raised in a week. This ought to help generate some press attention, as well as being an impressive sign of widespread, and undimming, enthusiasm for his campaign.

Comments

Kurt | October 1, 2007, 12:19am | #

And there's still time for people to donate in central, mountain & pacific. This baby ain't over!

jordan selvidge | October 1, 2007, 12:29am | #

We dont need the key - we'll break in. We will force the controlled mainstream media to take notice. Ron Paul's campaign is about shifting the power from the corporate controlled elites back to the people whom this constitution is supposed to protect. I view this campaign as the beginning to a revolution. People are so dumbed down in this country that things may get much worse before they get better. I hope that before that happens and before the Neocons ruin us and turn this country into a police state that the freedom movement will prevail peacefully.
we gotta take the power back

Karsten | October 1, 2007, 12:38am | #

"And there's still time for people to donate in central, mountain & pacific. This baby ain't over!"

So what counts is where the donor is sending from?

asg | October 1, 2007, 12:41am | #

No, it means that the fundraising period ends at midnight, not midnight EST.

Josh | October 1, 2007, 12:51am | #

Hey Jordan Selvidge, it's cute quoting Rage Against the Machine, but you understand that Paul's ideology and theirs are almost polar opposites, right? Just checkin'.

Pace | October 1, 2007, 1:20am | #

Reading this post, I felt compelled before midnight Pacific time to make a donation. I have just donated $50 to Ron Paul.

Also, I will mention I am all the more enthusiastic because having talked casually with family members and random people in the nations capital over the weekend, people who had never heard of Ron Paul, I have made some recent converts.

danb | October 1, 2007, 1:30am | #

graph showing total over time.

http://www.chowda.net/fundraiser

there will be updates later

Ted | October 1, 2007, 1:41am | #

I'm amazed, when I saw the fundraiser at $200,000 I thought there was no way it could make it to $500,000.

I sent $25 anyway. Feels good.

Steve | October 1, 2007, 1:57am | #

I live the graph! Can you change the ratio by the hour? and remove the constant? Then repost it.

Thanks

Stephen | October 1, 2007, 2:25am | #

Here is a auto updating graph

http://www.ohcalvary.org/rp.php

shell | October 1, 2007, 2:30am | #

here's a whole bunch of donation graphs:
http://slact.net/paulcash.php

Luke | October 1, 2007, 2:30am | #

Dear Reason Staff,

Why hasn't there been a peep about Paul's campaign in the print version of your magazine? He's the best thing happening for Libertarians right now ... He should be on the cover every month! What gives?

Hope for America | October 1, 2007, 2:30am | #

"Aggressive wars, income taxes, national IDs, domestic spying, torture regimes, secret prisons, Federal Reserve manipulation -- we don't have to take it any more."
~Ron Paul, candidate for President of the United States

Stephen Forbush | October 1, 2007, 2:41am | #

I started a $100 million Pledge site for Paul
pledgebank dot com/Pauls-100mill

It might not make it but It might generate some PR even if I only get several thousands.
Have fun see how many respond, sign on.

steve

Stephen B. | October 1, 2007, 3:23am | #

I gave the 500 dollars that I hit on a Massachusetts scratch ticket to Ron Paul!! I wanted to keep 250.00 for myself but decided that what Ron paul is trying to do for our country is more important because without our freedom's what do we have?

John C. Randolph | October 1, 2007, 3:57am | #

No tax money, no lobbyist money, no union money, no foreign money.

Ron's the first candidate who's ever gotten a campaign contribution from me.

-jcr

RK | October 1, 2007, 5:27am | #

I second that John C.

Jason Nugent | October 1, 2007, 6:17am | #

Ron Paul is the only candidate I would vote for, on either side of the aisle. I was not able to donate during this fundraising 'surge', but I will begin donating next month. $1.2 million in a week!? What other candidate can say they've done that with most of the donations coming from individuals who gave $200.00 or less? There's a lot more support for RP than the media is letting on.

Bradford C. | October 1, 2007, 6:35am | #

Luke -
I'd speculate it mostly has to do with the fact that Ron Paul isn't the best thing to happen to Libertarians. That if we were to give him too much attention, it would highlight exactly how un-libertarian Ron Paul really is and cause people to question us along the lines of, "Oh you mean a libertarian LIKE RON PAUL?"

Untermensch | October 1, 2007, 7:14am | #

Bradford C.-

Interesting response. Are you in favor then of a libertarian ideologue who wouldn't get half the attention? I'm just curious what you're getting at. For what it's worth, having people ask "Oh you mean a libertarian LIKE RON PAUL?" is a lot better than what I get today:

• What's a libertarian?
• You mean the guys who don't believe in roads?
• Aren't those the guys who believe in sexual excess? (from a cousin who thought I'd said "libertine")
• So you're a John Bircher?" (I get this one a lot and I don't even know where to start to answer anyone that misguided)

To me it looks like your dreaded response is a real step up, even if RP isn't ideologically pure. I'd much rather answer that question than any of those I listed above, so in my estimation, RP is a great boon for actually engaging someone on what libertarian ideas are, and I'd welcome anyone who would ask that question. At least then they have some idea of what a libertarian might be and then we can bring up where RP might differ from a "purely" libertarian standpoint.

So bring on your problem...

Untermensch | October 1, 2007, 7:16am | #

Aren't those the guys who believe in sexual excess?

I do realize that on this list, there will be many who would argue this isn't such a bad definition, although they might disagree whether "excess" is even possible, but I'll ignore that group…

Derick and the Donderos | October 1, 2007, 8:35am | #

Argh! Blech! $*&@^*^*^%(@!!

Giving to Paul is like donating directly to Al Qaeda! He'll cut and run, and won't use government money to buy even a SINGLE NUKE. If you're wondering, "Well, what will we bomb Iran with?", then you've answered your own question.

Islamofascists, etc.

Oh, and 9/11.

(incoherent mumbling)

rdkraus | October 1, 2007, 8:36am | #

I sent money twice.

When have I done that before? Never.

It's worth it, if for nothing more than the entertainment value.

Elemenope | October 1, 2007, 8:44am | #

re:Bradford C.

I'd always thought of Ron Paul as a paleoconservative who, due to a respect for the Constitution acted for the most part like a Libertarian, and subordinated his paleo- (and occasionally religious-) leanings to the restrictions outlined upon federal powers.

Occasionally he slips, but he's pretty good on any metric I've seen compared to any other seated politician in the US on what Libs tend to care about. What is the point of waiting for a "true" lib politician who is too extreme to get elected? Ron Paul is pretty close to the edge as it is.

Taktix® | October 1, 2007, 8:46am | #

I'd rather give $100 to a losing Ron Paul than $1 to a winning Rudy McRomThompson.

It's a question of morals which, for you bible thumpers out there, do exist outside of Theology...

Sean | October 1, 2007, 8:53am | #

My girlfriend and I both donated 150 this past week and got to see our names pop up on the site!!

Reinmoose | October 1, 2007, 9:01am | #

so amazing. so amazing...

Edward | October 1, 2007, 9:03am | #

A fool and his money are soon parted...

Edwards | October 1, 2007, 9:19am | #

I knew there were some idiots on this site, but this takes the cake. I'm through with you nutjobs.

Warren | October 1, 2007, 9:23am | #

RON PAUL is the real deal. This is it folks. Anyone not on board with the PAUL in 08 campaign at this point, is an enemy of liberty.

Ron Paul will change the political establishment. He already has. Big piles of cash simply can't be ignored. Indeed piles of cash may be the only thing the establishment truly cares about.

Ron Paul has got their attention. And his grass roots support gives him credibility that other politicians don't dare dreaming about.

RON PAUL is the HOPE FOR AMERICA
Be part of it, or be part of the problem.

x,y | October 1, 2007, 9:27am | #

Edward,

You quitting us again?

Billy | October 1, 2007, 9:28am | #

First time ever donated to a candidate or even gave a SH#% about the people in congress. THEY ARE ALL LAIRS! exp. Ron Paul it felt good go give money to the right person.

RUN RON RUN!!!

Smappy | October 1, 2007, 9:28am | #

Anyone not on board with the PAUL in 08 campaign at this point, is an enemy of liberty.


I'm on board with Ron Paul, but that statement smacks of "If your not with us, you're against us" nonsense. Besides which, I just don't think RP would agree.

Let's refrain from stooping to the level of the opposition, shall we?

JParker | October 1, 2007, 9:37am | #

Ron Paul is the first candidate to ever see a dime ($100) from me.

As a far as libertarian purity test results go I'm sure in the libertarian utopia Ron Paul would be considered on the right and the LP would be more on the left.

If Ron Paul is as far a compromise that has to be made to return a defender of The Constitution,liberty,sovereignty and sanity to the White House. I for one am not going to lose any sleep. Well I won't lose any from worry. Giddiness maybe but not worry.

robc | October 1, 2007, 9:44am | #

I knew there were some idiots on this site, but this takes the cake. I'm through with you nutjobs.

Edward, you are a liar.

robc | October 1, 2007, 9:46am | #

Taktix,

It's a question of morals which, for you bible thumpers out there, do exist outside of Theology

Ron Paul is a gift from God, so it still falls under theology. :)

tarran | October 1, 2007, 9:58am | #

Oh come on folks, that wasn't the real edward. After all, how many people miss-spell their own name?

Warren | October 1, 2007, 9:59am | #

Smappy,
It's a fair cop. Allow me to revise and extend. The usual suspects for not supporting a libertarian candidate for office, do not apply to Ron Paul.

He is a serious candidate with serious support. Claims to his "loonyness" are disingenuous. The rest of the supposedly more acceptable candidates are also "loony".

I find no legitimate reasons for a libertarian not to support RON PAUL. I do find his nay sayers to be LINOs

Tom W | October 1, 2007, 10:00am | #

What I want to know is how we're going to channel all of this just enthusiasm for Ron into real and lasting political change. We need Ron Paul-style candidates running in every Congressional district. I'm active in the RLC (rlc.org), which is one way of organizing libertarian Republicans.

And ditto what Smappy said, about Paulistas ranting 'him what is not my friend is my enemy' and all that.

Tom W | October 1, 2007, 10:04am | #

Also, I do agree with Warren's followup, about wanting the perfect so badly so you become an enemy of the good.

libertreee | October 1, 2007, 10:04am | #

Dear Reason Staff,

Why hasn't there been a peep about Paul's campaign in the print version of your magazine? He's the best thing happening for Libertarians right now ... He should be on the cover every month! What gives?

Actually, IMHO, you should be ragging on Cato. They seem to have it against Ron Paul so far. They did on puff piece on Fred Thompson because he is supposed to be so "frederalist" while dissing Ron Paul, who is supposed to be "too interested in the Iraq war" to be concerned about "domestic" issues.

No wonder Murray Rothbard broke with Ed Crane.

Steve | October 1, 2007, 10:08am | #

***** Stop The War & Corporate Corruption *****

Why Don't You Know Ron Paul??????

The corporate media will not give Ron Paul any Exposure. Because, NBC is owned by GE. GE is one of the world's largest war-makers. They make things that go boom. They make $Billions on war. A Ron Paul administration would be bad for business. CNN is owned by AOL. Majority share holder is Saudi Royal Talal who is also partners with GHWBush in The Carlyle Group. Another major warmaker. And on and on. You get the picture. This is why they are doing a Media Blackout on him. Because they don't WANT YOU TO KNOW THE TRUTH!!!!!

Who is Ron Paul?
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about

Join A ReVoLuTiOn Group In Your City:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/cities/

Who 0wns The Media?
http://www.mediaowners.com

Ron Paul Has WON 10 Straw-Polls!:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/

RESTORE YOUR LIBERTY & FREEDOM
SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT RON PAUL 2008!

He Will:

** Stop Iraq War Immediately
** Eliminate IRS
** Eliminate Federal Reserve
** Eliminate Government Wasteful Spending
** Restore America's Work Force & Values
** Restore America's Freedom!

GET UP AND GET ACTIVE TODAY!!!
Paul Is America's Last Hope!

El Capitan | October 1, 2007, 10:15am | #

Ron Paul is the only candidate I would ever donate money to, take a bullet for(yes even if that means I die and he lives), or actually have real faith in what he is starting. Im actually going to feel great voting for him. He's too important to this country to pass up.

Taktix® | October 1, 2007, 10:18am | #

Dear Reason Staff,

Why hasn't there been a peep about Paul's campaign in the print version of your magazine? He's the best thing happening for Libertarians right now ... He should be on the cover every month! What gives?

I seem to remember this coming up in a previous thread.

From what I recall (staff, correct me if I'm wrong), Reason would lose it's status under election law or whatever if they advocate for a specific candidate, rather than merely advocating for certain issues.

Any help here would be, well... helpful.

Heather | October 1, 2007, 10:25am | #

Woo-hoo! I was so excited to see that he made it! :-)

Warren | October 1, 2007, 10:30am | #

Reason would lose it's status under election law or whatever if they advocate for a specific candidate

Whatever. Reason has written many article about many politicians. A Ron Paul piece would be desirable. I hope to see one in the January issue, just ahead of the primaries.

depressed. | October 1, 2007, 10:37am | #

And Perot thought the great sucking sound was coming from Mexico -- close it was southern Texas as libertarians part of their funds. Millions raised but far, far less being spent in the reports I see. Sitting down in the low single digits and the money flows in but for what? I suggest they will find that they are financing a Congressional race when Paul drops out not a presidential race as they assume. Second, I suggest even then a huge amount of money will be left over and then what will he do it with it? Meanwhile actual libertarian organizations that have worked hard for years are hurting.

And why do people now think libertarians are Birchers? Ask Ron and his proBirch Society positions and his repeating in public of Birch Society paranoid conspiracy theories. Paul is as close to a Bircher in Congress as one has today. But since libertarians is now being equated with Bircher theories, anti-immigration nativism, opposition to separation of church and state, anti-abortion activism, etc., the confusion is warranted. Libertarians brought it on themselves in this case.

Millions that would have helped the long-term changes required to promote a libertarian society will be consumed in a flash-in-the-pan campaign. And since many donors are taping themselves out heavily now they won’t be able to help libertarian groups for sometime to come. The long term damage will be immense.

Tom W | October 1, 2007, 10:57am | #

Reason giving fair coverage of RP is not the same as an endorsement. As a longtime fan of both reason and RP, I'd love to see Ron's mug on the cover. It would surely burn up the newsstands. All the Paulestinians and other interested parties would snatch it up off the shelves faster than you can say New World Order (and be exposed to libertarian ideas in unadulterated form, hint hint).

The Reason Foundation, being a nonprofit, certainly cannot endorse a candidate. I don't know if there are any strings attached to the magazine because of this.

The beltway libertarian/free market nonprofits are likewise unable to endorse a candidate due to their legal status. I also think they tend to distance themselves from Ron Paul's attacks on CAFTA and the non-existent NAU, although many individual staff support him 100% on their own time.

A friend who works at an unnamed policy institute says all right-of-center think tanks are worried about Clinton II potentially sending the IRS to audit them.


> From what I recall (staff, correct me if I'm wrong), Reason would lose it's status under election law or whatever if they advocate for a specific candidate, rather than merely advocating for certain issues.

Lost_In_Translation | October 1, 2007, 11:03am | #

depressed,

Would you like any cheese with that whine?

James Anderson Merritt | October 1, 2007, 11:14am | #

# JParker | October 1, 2007, 9:37am | #
# Ron Paul is the first candidate to ever
# see a dime ($100) from me.

Last time I looked, today's "dollar" was worth only about 3 cents in pre-Federal Reserve dollars. So that means you gave Dr. Paul the equivalent of several dimes in "real money," but not all that many.

My wife has had a Series 1934 ten dollar bill in a shoebox for a long time. The other day, she pulled it out and we looked at it. From a distance, it looks pretty much like the "small portrait" ten-spot we had before the recent redesign. But looking at it up close, we saw significant differences. At the bottom of the note, for instance, it says "(the United States of America, named at the top of the bill) will pay to the bearer on demand TEN DOLLARS." The "fine print" message in the top-left region of the front of the bill says, "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private, and is redeemable in lawful money at the United States Treasury, or at any Federal Reserve Bank." (This wasn't a "silver certificate," by the way.)

That is to say, in 1934, paper notes STOOD FOR money. Today, however, while the Federal Reserve notes remain "legal tender for all debts, public and private," they declare themsevles AS money. There is no promise to exchange the notes for "lawful money" (or any other kind of money, for that matter). The piece of paper is what you get. If you go to the Fed or the Treasury and offer up Federal Reserve Notes, you can get more (different) notes, or coins in exchange. The change has taken place within the lifetimes of many people who are still living and alert. It's been strange to watch it happen.

Warren | October 1, 2007, 11:19am | #

depressed,
Snap out of it! The fact that he's sitting on millions of dollars is what counts. I don't give a rats ass what he spends it on. He can take my contributions and buy a south pacific island for all I care. He has done more than enough already to make it worth supporting him.

You need some perspective on the Birchers thing. The only people who see Ron Paul as a conspiracies supporter are other conspiracy supporters. I see no evidence for your claim that "people now think libertarians are Birchers".

Your lamenting of Ron Paul diverting funds and efforts better spent elsewhere, really leaves me scratching my head. I've been a Libertarian activist for the past twenty five years. Ron Paul's candidacy is the most exciting libertarian development I've ever seen. All the efforts to bring about "long-term changes required to promote a libertarian society" are going to be much better severed by this "flash-in-the-pan" campaign than all the ballot issues and LP members on the school board put together.

sadcox | October 1, 2007, 12:33pm | #

Sean Hannity implied that it was actually 1,201,860.52 donating the same dollar over and over.

Nothing to see here...

sixstring | October 1, 2007, 12:38pm | #

Yo, depressed. You are way off base. Money to Ron Paul is not coming at the expense of the Libertarian movement. If anything, the heightened exposure of Ron Paul will enhance the cause and bring more people (and money) to the fold. Regular people, not the ones who populate this site but the ones who pick up your trash or fit you for eyeglasses, are dissatisfied with the whole lot of candidates on both sides and are looking for an alternative. Having a candidate in a major party who so closely mirrors Libertarianism can only be a boon.

Here's a question that's been nagging -- how many of you folks who support Ron Paul have actually made the effort to join the Republican Party? He not only needs your money -- he needs your vote in the primary.

sadcox | October 1, 2007, 12:39pm | #

Dammit! Screwed that joke up...should have read:

"Sean Hannity implied that it was actually one person donating the same dollar 1,201,860.52 times."

Brandybuck | October 1, 2007, 12:48pm | #

Ron Paul makes a far better definition of libertarian than Eric Dondero every would. That people think he isn't libertarian just shows how rigid the purists have made the definition.

Ron Paul is a libertarian because his basic political philosophy is minimalist government and maximal freedom. He wants radical slashing of taxes, radical slashing of regulations, abolishing the bureaucratic monoliths in DC, stop the drug war, stop the poverty war, stop the Iraq war.

Heres some shockers: You can be a libertarian and not be an atheist! You can be a libertarian and not an anarchist! You can be a libertarian and not be an Objectivist. You can be a libertarian and not be 100% Rothbard Pure™.

Sandra Kallander | October 1, 2007, 12:55pm | #

Technically, it ran from noon Monday to midnight Sunday, and that's 12 hours less than a full week.

DenisL | October 1, 2007, 12:57pm | #

Not bad for a guy who the MSM says "can't win".
Freedom does work. People know it. AND people will vote for it!

Thank goodness for Paul and Kucinich with the four "front runners" Clinton, Obama, Romney, and Giuliani saying last week that they would NOT be out of Iraq by the end of their terms if these 4 were to win next November. Also with these four Iraq would be off the table in any future debates after the conventions.
What a crazy world when these 4 are the “front runners” and 2/3 of America want us out quickly! What do they know? What polls are they reading?

Go Ron Paul!

Ernest Hancock | October 1, 2007, 12:59pm | #

Newspapers are soooo last century. I have 4 children 17 - 22 and they don't even know what channel the news stations are on but they are well informed via the Internet. If you are so worried about convincing those that helped vote us into this mess to admit their many mistakes and support Ron Paul, then you'll have to do it with a lot more than TV coverage from the beast's belly. Quit your damn complaining and communicate directly with the people (signs, shirts, fliers, events, Pauloween, take Ron Paul home for the holidays with a nice DVD package for Mom and Dad etc) the bad guys hate this because they know that the truth is very difficult to be unlearned.

The media effort is focused to place fear and doubt into the minds of Ron Paul's supporters. What they didn't count on were so many activists with the mission of a true r3VOLution between the ears of the American people, and the political process is just a tool.

Computerized vote totals and massaged polls are nothing more than Matrix controls used to distract us from the truth about every effort to enslave us and our children for the benefit of "they/them/those".

Want to know who "They" are? Simple. 'There are those that wish to be left alone and there are those that will not leave them alone'. Determining who the bad guys are is much simpler than most think. If another is using force and/or the threat of force to prevent you from doing something or making you do something while you are not violating another's rights then they are the bad guys. And those that help them via communications (media) are also the bad guys. And bad guys are not going to help good guys (that's one of the easy ways to determine that they are bad).

A single sign on the freeway will communicate to hundreds of thousands of people each rush hour. Some of the most successful national talk radio shows are thrilled to have 20,000 listeners in a big city. Just something to think about.

Cesar | October 1, 2007, 1:06pm | #

In the list of reactions/questions people have when they say you are libertarian, you forgot"

"Libertarian? You mean you're like that Lyndon LaRouche guy??

Cesar | October 1, 2007, 1:08pm | #

I too, disagree with Ron Paul on some issues. But I agree with him 90% of the time, and agree with "mainstream" candidates about 10% of the time, so I'm not going to bitch about it.

Egosumabbas | October 1, 2007, 1:20pm | #

To all the Libertarians out there, I'm going to say something controversial. The LP is Dead Man Walking. This is due to the way that our government in the US is constructed at all levels: along two-party lines (sometimes just a single party, like in Chicago). If the US had a parliamentary style government, the LP would have some hope of gaining traction. As it stands, the *only* way big-and-small-L libertarians can gain traction is within the two-party system. I can see two candidates fitting this bill in the primaries: Ron Paul, and Mike Gravel. Since Ron Paul has much greater Vegas Odds right now, and several orders of magnitude more money, he's the man to support. The Democrat and Republican parties are just socio-political constructs - their positions shift all the time; left vs. right and conservative vs. liberal are all just smoke and mirrors. All thats needed is to infiltrate one (or both).

derek hulderman | October 1, 2007, 1:27pm | #

IF YOU'RE AGAINST RON PAUL, YOU"RE AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION.

Kevin Houston | October 1, 2007, 1:48pm | #

Ron Paul is the best thing to happen to Big-L Libertarians in a long time.

The MSM has repeated the word "Libertarian" so many times, that people are really starting to notice. While they mean it as a smear, their audience doesn't even know what it means. This gives us a huge opportunity to step in and provide that definition.

Ron Paul is not 100% Libertarian - true. He's not even 100% libertarian. But he is so much closser to it than anyone else running that we'd be fools not to support him with every asset we can muster.

The GOP is weak right now, due to people being lied to consistantly by the neocons. My own Mother (who was 100% in *love* with Dubya only 4 years ago) now hates him. The GOP stabbed their base in the back, on the assumption that they would not have anywhere else to go.

The GOP is seriously under-manned, and we can take it over - in the same way that Pat Buchanan took over the remnants of the reform party in 2000.

It's too early to know for sure, but we may be witnessing the demise of the GOP, just as the whigs crumbled in the 1850s.

Register Republican, go to the meetings, and takeover their conventions.

Later.

collin28 | October 1, 2007, 1:52pm | #

I subscribe to Google Alerts for all the Republican candidates and a couple of the democratic candidates. I spend many fun hours reading all the articles, blogs on the candidates and on all the comments and post. It blows me away how many people post comments on articles and blogs on Ron Paul... it can take an hour to read them all. On all the other candidates especially Fred Thompson it takes 3 minutes to read the couple of comments.
This says something to me.

I like so many others out there have never contributed to a presidential candidate until I contributed my hard earned money to Ron Paul. I have made 2 donations and will donate money every month out of my retirement check until I max out.

In 60 years I have never seen this kind of a person run for President. If Dr. Paul does not get elected I have contingency plans to move to Panama and leave this police state behind.

I just pray that America wakes up and learns the truth. I also agree that the RP campaign should come out with a quality 20 or 30 minute DVD and get them out to the people to pass around. I get most of my news on the Internet and I refused to watch FOX news network. I however do like Prison Break....

Go Ron Paul and may

Take that! | October 1, 2007, 1:57pm | #

I wouldn't vote for a 100% libertarian, but I'm voting for Ron.

Egosumabbas | October 1, 2007, 2:00pm | #

collin28: There is an unofficial dvd that you can either purchase or download and burn.
http://ronpauldvd.com/
It's not the highest quality, since it's videos taken off the internet, but it will have to do until the campaign headquarters releases their own DVD.

Also I'm totally with ya on the contingency plans.

Manqusso | October 1, 2007, 2:20pm | #

Go Ron! From L.A. to N.Y. I will help get out your message! God bless you sir!

Troy | October 1, 2007, 2:29pm | #

Ron Paul for President!!

2008

KILL THE FEDERAL RESERVE!!!!

Gadsdenfly | October 1, 2007, 2:38pm | #

Ron Paul has done more for the libertarian movement in the few months of his run than all the LP campaigns and libertarian think tanks have ever done. This will not take away from the libertarian movement it will enhance it! This will promote libertarian ideals, think tanks, scholars and perhaps the Libertarian Party!

For the first time there is actual and real momentum behind a candidate advocating ending whole federal departments, ending the IRS and Social Security, ending the War on Drugs, respecting the Constitution, and many other libertarian positions. Sure Ron Paul is not a "pure" libertarian whatever that means. I agree with many, many planks of the libertarian movement but 100% of them no. Taht 100% candidate does no exist! Some comments here suggest that because of some differences you would not support a candidate like Ron Paul? This is the same line of thinking that causes some libertarians to not support a bill legalizing marijuana if it includes taxation of marijuana. In my opinion a large step towards ending the prohibition trumps the details of such a bill.

A strong showing for Ron Paul in this primary season will show better than any scholarly book, think tank paper, or third party run that the general ideas of liberty and freedom are still popular and practical in the country today!

I sent Ron Paul the maximum contribution proudly as well as supporting Cato, Reason, the LP, and other causes throughout the years and I urge all libertarian minded people to put aside small differences with various stances and get behind this candidate!

Mitch C | October 1, 2007, 4:08pm | #

Just tuned into CNN doing a story on how all the D's and R's did fundraising this quarter. They mentioned EVERYBODY BUT Ron Paul and his amazing fund raising this week. Even McCain and Huckabee were discussed. Flood them with complaints!

James Anderson Merritt | October 1, 2007, 9:03pm | #

# Mitch C | October 1, 2007, 4:08pm | #

# Just tuned into CNN doing a story on how all
# the D's and R's did fundraising this
# quarter. They mentioned EVERYBODY BUT Ron
# Paul and his amazing fund raising this week.
# Even McCain and Huckabee were discussed.

Yeah, I picked up on that last night. RP's fundraising surge should have been big news -- or at least SOME news. At the time, I chalked it up to the networks running canned reports on the weekends. But if the 24-hour news networks haven't caught up to this piece of information by now, then they're simply not doing their jobs.

I observe that even Libertarian Party candidates get some "coverage" on news networks where they advertise. So perhaps we'll start hearing about RP when he starts spending some of his warchest with the networks who are now ignoring him. It would be wonderful if he would start by spending money with any outlets that reported this weekend's news while it was still fresh. Perhaps the others would get a clue.

Steven Talcott Smith | October 2, 2007, 1:20pm | #

The longtime problem with Libertarian-style politics is an over-obsession with doctrinal purity. It is the habit of left-brain, iNtuitive Thinkers, and the type of interaction typically observed among their numbers are a turnoff to many.

Ron Paul's campaign is the best thing to happen to this movement which now crosses so many party lines. Think of all the young people being introduced to these ideas! Many future politicians are undergoing formative experience right now. Get in and get involved.

This rising tide will lift all Libertarian boats and will move the political discussion decidedly in our direction along the libertarian/authoritarian axis where it belongs. Online political discussion seems always to reduce to this axis and it was only a matter of time before we would ride the Internet to broader popularity. The present administration simply handed us a golden strategic opportunity and Ron Paul was courageous enough to take it. This is a once-in-a-lifetime event. In your heart, you know it.

Justin O. | October 3, 2007, 1:35pm | #

Although Ron Paul might not be considered a full libertarian, he is a self-described constitutionalist (and his record backs certainly backs it up). Perhaps Reason could do an article highlighting the many similarities between Paul's positions and those of libertarians, which would have the effect of showing how libertarians, moreso than either the Republicans or Democrats, have a platform closest to that of the Constitution.