Posted on 05/18/2010 2:09:49 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Actually, I don't ever EVER watch the View.
I'm glad he defended the lives of the unborn there.
Today I was driving through a black section of town and I actually saw a Palin 2012 bumper sticker. There may be hope yet.
Rand Paul, if he gets the Senate seat, may just have enough time to distinguish himself and show himself to be a viable presidential candidate.
True.
He should beat the Dem easily
Yeah, I remember reading where the Founding Fathers smoked pot all the time and wanted to legalize drugs. And a lot of them were just as crazy as Ron Paul.
“Why is Sarah Palin getting so much attention, and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) so little, from the national media and pundit classes?”
Maybe it’s because we’re afraid that as soon as we elected him he would be beamed up by the mother ship.
Has Rand has kept who is father is, "a secret"? No. What I have just said has been all over the news since the beginning of Rand's campaign -- even Grayson complained about it, but it did him no good.
Good grief! You hate his father that much?
Bump!
He sure seemed to play it down from what I saw. Grayson was trying to bring up the subject of his dad, that is a tactic that the democrat will now try to do, I hope that Rand can keep that to a minimum.
There is a reason why Ron could never win any elections outside of his district, I’m not counting when he and Russell Means were running for the libertarian thing.
Absolute nonsense.
Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%.
And Sarah Palin can't even carry Alaska, anymore.
His crazy PAID minions.?
And who would supposedly be "paying" for these imaginary "Ron Paul paid minions"? The Republican Party? I don't think so, given that they shut him out of the RNC. Big corporations? Uh, no. Some foreign lobby? No, given that RP advocates cutting off all foreign aid to them. Military contractors? Not hardly.
Regardless of anything else you might say about Ron Paul, that's one thing that you can't ever rightfully accuse him of because no one owns Ron Paul other than Ron Paul.
If you are going to make things up and pretend they are true, at least try not to insult people's intelligence while you are at it.
Ron Paul may be right about a few things, but he's wrong about some critical ones.
He won't protect America. Sarah will.
Palin endorsed Rand Paul - that had to help.
I’m glad she said she disagreed with him on some things, though.
Yes there is -- Ron Paul is a geek. And geeks make great teachers but have a limited appeal to the voting public-- unless the voting public is in trouble and the geek warned them of that trouble in advance, then they begin to appreciate that he knows what he's talking about.
Besides which, I really don't think that Ron Paul has ever been that politically ambitious. Even his 2008 presidential race, I don't think that he ran because he personally wanted to be president. I think that he ran to spread the ideas of Liberty -- and to shake up the political class -- to get people, especially the youth, involved in the political process again. And on that, he has succeeded brilliantly.
The man is a political machine, a career politician that has tried to run for the Senate in Texas and couldn’t get out of the primary.
I have never heard him referred to as a geek, but he is a political hack that exploits gullible, and worshipping followers.
People in general don’t like him because he creeps them out.
The man is one of the great examples of raw political ambition.
DeceptiCons. They do not have our nation's best interests at heart.
The Paulbots are more about destoying the GOP, including good conservatives. They only want to elevate Ron Paul and his acolytes into higher positions.
In a nutshell...
Sounds like a great ticket for the liberals.
Rand Paul won by the margin he did because James Dobson and Sarah Palin reassured conservatives Paul is pro-life and not an anti-military, anti-Christian Adam Kokesh/Bill Maher/Code Pinko type libertarian.
And whats the first thanks Palin gets for that?
This article.
He lost to Phil Gramm, who also the election and served in that position for the next 18 years. So what? Most politicians have lost an election or two to someone, including those who eventually went on to become president.
I have never heard him referred to as a geek, but he is a political hack that exploits gullible, and worshipping followers.
No, he is someone who makes people think and reminds them of the principles that this country was founded upon. This behavior tends to irritate some people -- including those who don't want to expend the effort of thinking and especially those who don't want to be constrained by rule of law.
Campaigning for Congressional term limits that would put him out of a political job, and delivering babies in his spare time, is not the usual modus operandi for anyone who could remotely be considered "a political hack".
Ron Paul may not be the right guy for POTUS at this point in his life, but he has served a very useful purpose in shifting the political paradigm and in breathing new life into a Party that was on it's way to becoming fossilized. I think he deserves respect for that thankless work, not a kick in the head.
He did more than lose an election, he is famous for being a perennial loser, he has never been able to win anything outside of his tight little district, even goofballs like Charlie Rangel have safe congressional districts that they cannot escape.
Outside of his little cult, people reject him, and have been for decades.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.