[Graybeard58]

instinct tells me not to touch Ron Paul with a ten foot pole.

Not even with a borrowed 10 foot pole.

[G8 Diplomat]

Ron Paul: Fool or Scoundrel?

How 'bout both?

Wait, I have it--a phony Republican

[A_perfect_lady]

I think he's a kook. He reminds me of the type who, when you ask them what we should do *now*... they get all wild-eyed and say, "Have you ever read The Creature From Jekyll Island?? It all started with the creation of the Federal Reserve!!"

Well, okay, sure. But that does us no good NOW, so what do we do NOW?

"We never should have gotten involved in WWI!"

Uh. Right. Okay. So what do we do NOW?

"Do you know about the Rothschild connection??"

I mean, it's like dealing with someone who wanders around museums with a dueling pistol and a copy of The DaVinci Code clutched in their hand.

[ari-freedom]

I’m more concerned about Rudy as the biggest threat to the GOP. Not Ron Paul. Not even Ann Coulter or Michael Savage.

[absalom01]

He’s a Libertarian, not a conservative. He recognizes that the Libertarian party is a lost cause, and so runs as a Republican.

[rb22982]

Your post is about as Kooky as you claim Ron Paul to be. A Democratic conspiracy? He’s not even close to getting the Republican nomination so it doesn’t even matter. Excluding Iraq, his positions are still just too extreme for the majority of America (elimination of all entitlement programs, abolishment of the federal income tax, etc) to ever be anything more than help keep spending in line to some degree. Besides Iraq, every position of his is at DIRECT odds with the Democratic Party. He’s Pro States Rights, against affirmative action, against Roe Vs Wade, against entitlement programs, etc.

[Old 300]

The second possibility is less likely but nonetheless fun for the imagination: Ron Paul is part of a conspiracy, planned for decades, that covertly seeks something sinister—either a Hillary presidency (by means of dividing the conservative vote) or the downfall of the United States.

Rino globalists and overtly socialist Democrats are already about a stone's throw away from accomplishing that goal. We will be compromised from within by those groups if we do not wake up and stop them.

I hear a voice in Ron Paul standing against them with real ideas. For example, his intent to abolish the Federal Reserve and bring back a precious metal-based currency standard. When the private bankers got control over our currency in 1913, it was inevitable that liberals would take inexorable control over our entire society. And that is happening, without a doubt.

Considering the money we spend on global redistribution of American wealth for the purpose of 'diplomacy' (the transfer of wealth via declining dollar value nothwithstanding) we have not just domestic communism to fight, but now international socialism funded by our own politicians. It must stop. These are more important issues than anything else right now.

[Allegra]

I get the feeling he's just a moonbat, although he could be so good at deception that he does have evil intentions.

The way some of his followers obsessively worship him is also somewhat off-putting. You wonder if the're all waiting for the Mother Ship to come and get them.

[traviskicks]

Ron Paul is part of a conspiracy, planned for decades, that covertly seeks something sinister

LOL! I thought it was Ron Paul and his supporters who were the 'kooks' and 'conspiracy theorists'?

[JohnBovenmyer]

If he still is a true libertarian than someone should ask him some questions at a ‘GOP’ debate that point out the difference between ‘conservative’ and ‘libertarian’ positions and also between ‘liberal’ and ‘libertarian’ positions. By appearing to be just an anti-war and anti-’generic big spending’ candidate he’s getting some passes he doesn’t deserve. If he has to publicly defend legalizing drugs, ending federal subsidies of student loans, supporting gun rights, ending welfare, medicare, medicaid, social security, farm subsidies and a lot of other specific government spending, etc. he’s going to lose support of those who are on the right or left, but like some part of the libertarian agenda in favor of candidates who more accurately reflect their beliefs. If he’s now a loon instead of an orthodox libertarian his answers will let us know and cost him that base. Still, I do wish there were some way to harness his fans' obvious spam skills. Just imagine a poll in Tehran, “Who is Allah’s Prophet?” where the winner come up “Ron Paul.”

[stephenjohnbanker]

He won’t matter anyway.

[word_warrior_bob]

Annoying pain in the ass.

The titles of his threads are sometimes cause for a hearty chuckle or a choking back of vomit.

I never read the threads or articles about him, I read enough about him without even trying. This is my first.

Perhaps the people for Paul could start supporting Hillary as they have mastered the art of annoyance and subsequent backlash.

[peyton randolph]

He’s just taking a play from the Jesse Jackson/Pat Buchanan playbook. Find a fringe niche that 1% of the population supports and milk that 1% for money and publicity.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

[Jim W N]

Is this news? Where’s the news link?

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Ok, let's get the ball rolling here. Just how i wanted to spend my Sunday afternoon </sarcasm>

i'm not criticising you, even though you are obviously the author of this vanity piece. i'm merely pointing out where you may wish to extend and revise.

Something about Ron Paul doesn’t smell right. Despite the fact that he appears to advocate core conservative values such as upholding the constitution and limiting government power, instinct tells me not to touch Ron Paul with a ten foot pole. Conservatives understand this. He’s just too kooky. I think it comes down to two possibilities: either Ron Paul is very foolish or he is very evil.

This is a classic example of what is called the Excluded middle fallacy.

Let's demonstrate how that happens with the following statement of yours:
I think it comes down to two possibilities: either Ron Paul is very foolish or he is very evil.

There are actually four options here:

• OPTION 1: Ron Paul is very foolish.
• OPTION 2: Ron Paul is very evil.
• OPTION 3: Ron Paul is neither foolish nor evil.
• OPTION 4: Ron Paul is both very foolish and very evil.

The fallacy is that you have attempted to force the reader into two, and only two options, when in fact, other possibilities exist.

In short, you're trying to dismiss Ron Paul without discussion or debate of particulars by limiting the other choices.

It’s true that on a certain level, tending to our own political and economic affairs here in the U.S. is where we should focus most of our resources. But the cauldrons of tyranny and terror are ever-present in far reaches of the world.

As a very wise morning drive radio host named Jim Quinn has often observed, "Remember, everything before "but" is BS.", at least from the perspective of the one making the statement. Let's ask you a question: How many Americans, and people residing in America died from terrorist attacks in the past 20 years?

...got an answer

...good!

Now, How many Americans, or residents of America have died in automobile accidents in the past 20 years? i'll bet you find that the last number is at least an order of magnitude greater than the first number.

Puts a perspective on our alleged 'terrorism problem' doesn't it?

When these wicked brews begin to boil over and spill their hateful contents onto our land, that’s the point where we must take action to extinguish the fire at its source. We did so in Japan and Germany sixty-odd years ago, and we are now doing it in Iraq.

We went after Japan only after they attacked us, and Germany only after they declared war on us.

When did Iraq attack or declare war on us?

Ron Paul’s behavior is consistent with two possibilities. The first possibility allows for the notion that Paul is an honest man with true libertarian beliefs who just doesn’t understand the reality of geopolitics, thus he is basically a kook hopelessly unfit for the oval office. The second possibility is less likely but nonetheless fun for the imagination: Ron Paul is part of a conspiracy, planned for decades, that covertly seeks something sinister—either a Hillary presidency (by means of dividing the conservative vote) or the downfall of the United States.

Another excluded middle fallacy. Hopefully you've now been better educated, and won't make these kinds of stupid mistakes again.

Have a good day.

[South40]

Fool

[Brilliant]

He’s not my first, second or third choice, but I’d vote for him over Hillary.

[jrooney]

"Ron Paul: Fool or Scoundrel?"

Both without a doubt.

[longtermmemmory]

easy he is a scoundrel whose monolithic ego is allowing him to be used as a fool.

Can we start an email campaign directed at FNC to boot him off the debate?

[WWTD]

For someone who is claiming Paul to be either delusional or insidious, intentionally placing your little rant in the news/activism area of FR doesn’t speak too well of your honesty, either.