Ron Paul is blowing up real good

Salon ^ | June 2, 2007 | Michael Scherer

[Austin Willard Wright]

The antiwar, pro-gold, libertarian presidential candidate Ron Paul tells me he would rather be riding his bicycle than speaking to another reporter on a Thursday afternoon. "My vice is that I'm obsessed with exercise," says the Republican congressman from Texas.

But running for president does not exactly disagree with him. All day long, he has been hustling from one press appearance to the next, a high-energy bundle packed into a lithe 71-year-old frame. His brown eyes sparkle with fire as he blurts out one big adjective after another. "Preposterous," he says of Rudy Giuliani, who accused Paul in mid-May of blaming America for the attacks of Sept. 11.

[snarks_when_bored]

Ron Paul: doofus on the loose-us...

[Austin Willard Wright]

Ron Paul ping

[MichiganConservative]

"My vice is that I'm obsessed with exercise,"

Well, this right here shows that he is completely out of touch with most Americans. How can he hope to reach the land-whale demographic if all he does is talk about how he likes to exercise?

[fieldmarshaldj]

Dr. Demento is blowin' up REAL good !

[johnny7]

The conservatives Kucinich...

[X-Ecutioner]

Wow! It would explain why he look so strong for 71.

[Darkwolf377]

His brown eyes sparkle with fire

Can't stop fiddlin'

Til I get my Ritalin

--The Simpsons

[Stepan12]

Ron Paul/Adam Ghadan in 2008!

[Reaganesque]

Jamie want big boom!!

[snarks_when_bored]

Yup.

[johnny7]

Buchanan could be his Secretary of State...

[Allegra]

Buchanan could be his Secretary of State...

And Lyndon LaRouche as Secretary of Defense...

[gas0linealley]

This is why Paul is running. Though he has no real shot at winning, he has a lot to say. He's the only Republican candidate who wants to end U.S. involvement in Iraq and withdraw the U.S. Navy from the waters off the Iranian coast. He wants America to pull out of the United Nations, NATO, the International Criminal Court, and most international trade agreements. He wants to abolish FEMA, end the federal war on drugs, get rid of the Department of Homeland Security, send the U.S. military to guard the Mexican border, stop federal prosecutions of obscenity, eliminate the IRS, end most foreign aid, overturn the Patriot Act, phase out Social Security, revoke public services for illegal immigrants, repeal No Child Left Behind, and reestablish gold and silver as legal tender.

Sounds good to me.

[Dustbunny]

Ron Paul is blowing up real good

Shame this is happening to a good man.

Every candidate that runs on the MSM agenda, lose. Has something to do with what the MSM say the people want and what people truly do want are completely opposites.

[thebaron512]

I do support many things on his “wish” list, but I would maintain crushing terrorists.

[Dead Corpse]

Yeah, but he lacks common ground with the RINO contingent so they feel a compulsion to slander him to make their liberalim feel better to themselves...

[LonePalm]

That's funny, I rather he was exercising than running for President too.

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

[Drango]

I don’t know who’s worse...Salon or L Ron Paul.

[Bigg Red]

Sounds good to me.

**
Did it also sound good to you when he echoed the al-Qaeda propaganda that on September 11 we got what we asked for?

[MichiganConservative]

...send the U.S. military to guard the Mexican border...revoke public services for illegal immigrants

Well, that just shows that he's out of touch.

[Bigg Red]

Shame this is happening to a good man.

&&
I don’t think that a “good man” would maintain that on September 11 we got what we asked for.

[gas0linealley]

Big online betting operation has lowered the odds against Ron Paul from 200 to 1 down to 15 to 1. This blowing up is not a bad thing.

[Jeremydmccann]

or better yet, the conservatives conservative.

[Cicero]

Salon wishes.

[johnny7]

...or better yet, the conservatives conservative.

More like a wartime-isolationist... odious but unique for this Republic.

[gas0linealley]

“Did it also sound good to you when he echoed the al-Qaeda propaganda that on September 11 we got what we asked for?”

Do you remember the “Cuban Missle Crises”?

I do. I remember how much I hated Russia for putting those missles right next door. And I remember cheering JFK when he bullied Kruschev into removing them.

It’s a two way street.

[gas0linealley]

Aren’t his views refreshing though?

[Irontank]

I don’t think that a “good man” would maintain that on September 11 we got what we asked for

I don't understand you guys...Ron Paul said that US government policies (i.e. interventionism) is the reason Al Qaeda attacked the US on 9/11...now...do you guys dispute that as a matter of fact? (I can cite you AQ expert after AQ expert and US government reports that state exactly what Ron Paul said)

Or are you just angry that a Presidential candidate spoke the truth?

[Allegra]

Yeah, but he lacks common ground with the RINO contingent so they feel a compulsion to slander him to make their liberalim feel better to themselves...

Yeah, because wanting to surrender to the terrorists and blaming 9/11 on U.S. Middle Eastern policies aren't liberal concepts at all.

[Dead Corpse]

Which as has been pointed out ad nauseum, isn't what Dr. Paul said.

Thanks for perpetuating the stupidity though...

[Dead Corpse]

Which as has been pointed out ad nauseum, isn't what Dr. Paul said.

Thanks for perpetuating the stupidity though...

[The_Eaglet]

Thanks for the flag. It was an interesting article even though they tried to downplay Paul's appeal on issues other than foreign policy.

The title was strange although I do not have high expectations from Salon.

[Allegra]

Which as has been pointed out spun ad nauseum, isn't what Dr. Paul said.

There. Much better.

[Silly]

Great headline.

[The_Eaglet]

Yeah, because wanting to surrender to the terrorists and blaming 9/11 on U.S. Middle Eastern policies aren't liberal concepts at all.

30 posted on 06/02/2007 11:21:56 AM EDT by Allegra (Socks.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Allegra
Which as has been pointed out ad nauseum, isn't what Dr. Paul said. Allegra's post is wrong on two points. 1. It wrongly implied that Ron Paul wants to surrender to terrorists and blames 9/11 on U.S. Middle Eastern Polices.

2. It wrongly implies that U. S. Middle eastern policies are not liberal.

[The_Eaglet]

bump for discussion

[Allegra]

1. It wrongly implied that Ron Paul wants to surrender to terrorists and blames 9/11 on U.S. Middle Eastern Polices.

OK, the Democrats call it "ending the war." Really,there are only two options. Stay and complete the mission or surrender. You can pretty that term up all you want, but it's still surrender. What does Ron Paul want to do, then? Unstart the war? Seriously. Enlighten me.

2. It wrongly implies that U. S. Middle eastern policies are not liberal.

Well, you twisted those words pretty well (CNN is looking for people like that!), but regardless, that is a matter of opinion.

So, no, I'm not wrong. But I've noticed with the RP crowd, that any disagreement with his policies are just viewed as wrong, instead of differing opinions.

[Dead Corpse]

I should have known better than to thhink you’d be capable of a cogent argument...

[ex-snook]

He can be wrong about everything but he is right about Iraq.

[Dead Corpse]

Good catch...

[MichiganConservative]

Aren’t his views refreshing though?

They are pretty much my own.

I used to be one of those people who supported Bush's version of the War on Terror. Bush has pretty much cured me of that himself, though. Islamo-democracy building over there and handing the country over to Mexico over here is not my idea of what we should be doing. What's the point of fighting a war on terror when there's no country left worth defending?

America is dead. Nothing can save us from committing suicide.

[Hostage]

Ron Paul is 99% correct. He is a walking model of honesty and integrity.

Where he falls is in his ability to convince voters that he can protect the USA against terrorism and that he can stop insane rulers from getting the bomb.

Someone needs to appoint him to the US Supreme Court. And no, you don’t need to be a lawyer to be appointed there, you need only an ability to write well and analyze legal issues of the Constitution. I would sleep well knowing he would replace the likes of Souter or Breyer.

[The_Eaglet]

OK, the Democrats call it "ending the war." Really,there are only two options. Stay and complete the mission or surrender. You can pretty that term up all you want, but it's still surrender

1. No, it's not surrender. As far as I know Iraq does not belong to the United States, so there is no land to surrender.

2. The expenditure of our tax dollars, American lives, and Iraqi civilians is liberal. The occupation's contribution to the national debt and our tax burden is liberal.

[The_Eaglet]

Thank you.

Which as has been pointed out nauseum, isn't what Dr. Paul said.

This was a good call. Keep it up.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Fred has gained some weight and lost some of that hair since that picture was taken.

[Allegra]

I should have known better than to thhink you’d be capable of a cogent argument...

I notice you seem incapable of answering my question. You respond to a legitimate question with an insult. In fact, it's all I've ever seen you do - accuse others of not debating and then deliver insults.

You want to know why rational people don't want to debate you people? Because we've all tried and have gotten a bunch of insults in response. Whenever someone criticizes a Ron Paul plank, most of his followers howl like hyenas and act as if they have been personally criticized. They start slinging insults from the get-go. Therefore, they become a laughingstock and fodder for amusement.

If all of the Ron Paul fans are as....shall we say, personable and charming as what I've seen on FR and a couple of other sites, then I kind of feel sorry for the guy. If this is what he's going to get for campaign workers, it will definitely be a detriment.

I haven't seen a lot in the way of PR skills among the Ron Paul contingent.

[Allegra]

1. No, it's not surrender. As far as I know Iraq does not belong to the United States, so there is no land to surrender.

What do you call it then? What is your term for it? Or, I suppose I should ask, what is Ron Paul's term for it?

What exactly would the cult call a cut-and run policy? If it's not surrender, then what is it?

[Dead Corpse]

You asked a question based on a false premise... Akin to asking, "Have you stopped beating your spouse yet?"

The first few posts on a thread like this always seem to contain detractors whose only response is "Ron Paul is a nutbag"... How do you respond to such things? There is no logical way to do so.

Nor is there a way to respond to your idiocy. You submit that Ron Paul is pro-Al Queda. This despite his wanting a full out Declaration of War against terrorist harboring nations, Letter's of M&R to hunt them down no matter where they hide, and a call from Dr. Paul for ALL Americans to reassert their RKBA as a further line of defense against "sudden jihad syndrome".

And yet, people like you still insist he's somehow "anti-war" or pro-terrorist. This is false. Slander. And really not worth my time to try and "be nice" to people like you... You aren't interested in the truth.

[mimaw]

It’s common sense he lacks when it comes to National Security. He wants to cut and run in Iraq and he’s against the Patriot Act as well as other measures used to secure us. What if we had a Ron Paul in 1980 instead of a Ronald Reagan? Do you think the Soviet Union would be in the dustbin of history? I’m not sure what era Ron Paul would have been good in but it sure isn’t now.