Posted on 01/11/2007 6:06:07 PM PST by Rodney King
Texas Congressman Ron Paul files for GOP presidential bid
HOUSTON -- Ron Paul, the iconoclastic nine-term congressman from southeast Texas, took the first step Thursday toward launching a second presidential bid in 2008, this time as a Republican.
Paul filed incorporation papers in Texas on Thursday to create a presidential exploratory committee that allows him and his supporters to collect money on behalf of his bid. This will be Paul's second try for the White House; he was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988.
Kent Snyder, the chairman of Paul's exploratory committee and a former staffer on Paul's Libertarian campaign, said the congressman knows he's a long shot.
"There's no question that it's an uphill battle, and that Dr. Paul is an underdog," Snyder said. "But we think it's well worth doing and we'll let the voters decide."
Paul, of Lake Jackson, acknowledges that the national GOP has never fully embraced him despite his nine terms in office under its banner. He gets little money from the GOP's large traditional donors, but benefits from individual conservative and Libertarian donors outside Texas. He bills himself as "The Taxpayers' Best Friend," and is routinely ranked either first or second in the House of Representatives by the National Taxpayers Union, a national group advocating low taxes and limited government.
He describes himself as a lifelong Libertarian running as a Republican.
Paul was not available for comment Thursday, Snyder said.
But he said the campaign will test its ability to attract financial and political support before deciding whether to launch a full-fledged campaign. Snyder said Paul is not running just to make a point or to try to ensure that his issues are addressed, but to win.
Paul is expected to formally announce his bid in the next week or two, Snyder said.
Snyder said Paul and his supporters are not intimidated by the presence of nationally known and better-financed candidates such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona or former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.
"This is going to be a grassroots American campaign," he said. "For us, it's either going to happen at the grassroots level or it's not."
Paul limits his view of the role of the federal government to those duties laid out in the U.S. Constitution. As a result, he sometimes casts votes that appear at odds with his constituents and other Republicans. He was the only Republican congressman to vote against Department of Defense appropriations for fiscal year 2007.
The vote against the defense appropriations bill, he said, was because of his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he said was "not necessary for our actual security."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not b
I would think a much, much bigger con is the 10 of millions of are persuaded to vote for candidates who don't really represent their views. If I vote for Paul, I will be voting for the guy I want to win. Every year, most people vote for someone who isn't really there preferred candidate, but is perhaps slightly better than the other one. Which is the bigger con? I will vote for the guy I best want to represent me. Can you say that? Were you able to say that in 1996 when Dole was the GOP candidate? No, my FRiend, it is not me who is being conned.
ROFLMAO.............
*Smooch*
People in Paul's district (I used to be one) have become accustomed to "Dr. No's" sometimes whacked out views on foreign matters. They respect his domestic views.
As one who personally worked on Dr. Paul's failed Libertarian Presidential bid in 1984, I will not be fooled into supporting him again. I love him, but.. I'm older and wiser these days.
His office partner did deliver both of my boys though. Always thankful for that. :-)
Yes because continuing a failed action with even more materials will make it stick the second time round right? It is not surrender. However simplistic thinking that this is the first time Western nations have tried to implement their ideals into Middle Eastern countries is folly. Didn't work then, and history will bear this out, it won't work this time either. No matter if you give every d*mn Iraqi a purple finger.
Don't worry your self though. I have no dog in the hunt except my vote for Rep. Paul for President which I will proudly cast.
LOL! I think I've heard that a few times these past couple of days. Yes, from a few Republicans, a whole lot of Democrats, a lot of reporters...but not from anyone worth considering.
:0)
Just what do you consider a "conservative", George W. Bush? LOL
Yep, it could have been-cut-the-cord-and-run Paul.
But according to the "true" conservatives here, Duncan Hunter is going to win..... I do have a question, who has heard of Duncan Hunter outside of FreeRepublic and his District....
An odd question from someone who thinks cutting and running on the war is a conservative value.
My wife uses their cake mixes all the time. They're pretty good.
The same number of people who blew their brains out yesterday claiming Suzanne Somers took time out from surveying her burned to the ground house to make a political statement about Iraq.
'Bout ten.
And a LOT of people died in Vietnam just so connected companies could make money on a war Robert Strange McNamara KNEW could not be won way back when we were just ramping up. In his own words in his autobiography, he said that he knew way back when that we would not be able to win in Vietnam... but did NOTHING to stop it. Is it so far out of the realm of possibility that something similar can be happening here?
While never one to fail to mention the awkwardness of some of the positions of Congressman Paul myself, it probably shows the depth of the divisions on the right that his announced candidacy is cause for derision and celebration on the same thread.
While certainly not a libertarian and as one who sees his outlandish alliances against the Iraq war as very counterproductive to the war on terror response to Al Queda in general, I actually would welcome his candidacy.
It is easy to throw out the comment that this nation is fighting for its life. It is harder to diagnose why and in what way the nation is making this fight. Are we fighting only for our life against an attacker such as bin Laden and the jihadists or are we also fighting against many and varied attacks against our constitution as well?
I would maintain the latter and that being so, anyone who will focus the debate on constitutional issues is a plus for me despite the case where Paul allows his rigid libertarian ideology to force him into some of his ridiculous positions.
Chief, while I always enjoy the fun of getting to one of our crazy libertarian members along with you, this is one area I will let them have their run. Paul has been in many ways a loyal member of the Republican Liberty Caucus (except for his love fest with Dennis) and not a third party nut. Let him take his run and we might be surprised at some of the issues that he focuses on. As all strains of conservatism rode to the flag to fight Clinton, we can often make common cause from all kinds of input.
I want to see him run just so I can see McCain have a stroke debating him.
Oh my! You think this guy can single-handedly eliminate income tax?
Well, there is that.......LOL.
Like I posted earlier; the more the merrier. I want to see a full field of candidates!
No, I never said that. It is quite normal to talk about presidential candidates based upon their beliefs, even though we all know that they can't just will things into (or out of) being.
OK bigtom, where is the link to this "truth"?
Unfortunately his loyalty doesn't extend to his own country. While he may have some ideas worthy of discussion, I find the thought of bringing a white flag to the debate table repellent.
No.....
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.