E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
With Newt Gingrich now surging in the polls, the first Republican presidential candidate to attack him in a paid TV ad isn’t Mitt Romney. Or Rick Perry. Or Michele Bachmann.
Instead, it’s Ron Paul.
The Texas congressman has emerged, arguably, as Gingrich’s most vocal critic -- at least for now -- cutting a web video from last week that was scathingly critical of the former Speaker into a 60-second TV spot for air in Iowa.
"We wanted to ensure this ad reached as many voters as possible, to debunk the myth that the Newt we are seeing on the 2012 campaign trail is the conservative he has been touted to be all along," Paul campaign manager Jesse Benton said in a statement.
Ron Paul criticizes Newt Gingrich of "serial hypocrisy" in a new TV ad.
The ad casts Gingrich as inauthentic and hypocritical on issues like bailouts and health care, and fueled by his lucrative work as a political advocate after leaving Congress.
It's a line of attack that political observers have more likely expected to come from former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose campaign has been forced to reckon with the Gingrich surge in the closing weeks before Iowa's Jan. 3 caucuses.
But Paul has been especially dogged in his criticism of Gingrich, attacks that may well be serving Romney's needs just as much as Paul's.
"I think that he's getting a free ride. And I've worked with him for a long time. And I think the points I made on the various issues, he's a flip-flopper, so he can hardly be the alternative to Mitt Romney," Paul said last week in New Hampshire.
The libertarian-minded congressman has staked much of his political capital in Iowa, where he made a major push in August's Ames Straw Poll, and finished a close second place. He's peppered the state's airwaves, and emphasized his opposition to abortion rights for the socially conservative caucus-goers in the state.
Gingrich leads, at 26 percent, in Iowa among likely Republican caucus-goers, according to the NBC News/Marist poll conducted over the weekend. He leads Romney at 18 percent, and Paul at 16 percent. A Des Moines Register poll showed similar results: 25 percent for Gingrich, 18 percent for Paul, and 16 percent for Romney.
Romney's campaign had been skittish about making a push in Iowa until recently, when it opened campaign headquarters in the state and launched a round of TV advertisements. Their bet appears to be that, in a splintered primary field, Romney could score well enough in Iowa to win or at least place highly, and carry that momentum into New Hampshire, where he leads in the polls.
But, given Paul's new attacks on Gingrich, it may just end up being the case that, if Romney wins the nomination, he may have Paul to thank.
Romney's leveled some mild criticism of Gingrich, calling him a "lifelong politician," but has otherwise stayed focused on President Obama. He might not have to release that focus on Obama as long as Paul does Romney's dirty work for him; it seems like a classic case where, for Romney, the enemy of his enemy is his friend.
It's not that Romney has escaped criticism from Paul; an ad from the libertarian congressman's campaign last month pilloried Romney along with Herman Cain and Rick Perry. But Paul's campaign has, more often than not, trained its focus on the rotation of candidates who have surged to become the leading alternative to Romney.
He said at an August debate that Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, who was surging at the time, "turns our rule of law on its head" for supporting a policy that would deny due process rights to terror suspects.
And Paul mixed it up at an early September debate with Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who was then surging in the polls.
"First off, you know, the governor of Texas criticized the governor of Massachusetts for Romneycare, but he wrote a really fancy letter supporting Hillarycare. So we probably ought to ask him about that," he said, channeling what would otherwise be an attack on Romney against Perry. It's just one of many times Paul targeted Perry in that debate.
And during an Oct. 11 debate, amidst the boomlet for Cain, Paul's campaign peppered reporters with opposition research about Cain, calling him a "TARP apologist," and attacking the former Godfather's Pizza CEO's signature 9-9-9 economic plan. In that debate, Paul assailed Cain's preference in economic advisers as "spoken like a true insider."
That isn't to minimize the instances in which Paul has tangled with Romney. Paul has sought to cast Romney as an establishment choice, and a June 5 moneybomb assailed Romney's "liberal record" as governor of Massachusetts.
But as the candidates approach the home stretch of the campaign, the beneficiary of Paul's focus on Gingrich may just be Romney's campaign, which might be spared from having to go intensely negative against Gingrich.
Leave a Comment:
So, Bluto has started the FOOD FIGHT with the poppin fresh dough boy!
Will 'the' Donald come to his rescue?
Can Calista save her 'main' squeeze?
One thing you can say about Ron Paul, he's not afraid of a fight. Of course the rest of the field wants to play nice so one of them can be VP
This proves those crazy little eyes of Ron Paul can see clearly spot the crazy crap. Too bad though at other times ron Paul can't see how crazy he, himself, is.
W-T-H they're all nuts in that 3 ring Klown Kar it only gives more credence Obama will be re-elected.
Now the fun starts. Paul believes in what he's saying, he has nothing to lose and what he has to say will make a big impact on how others see Newt. I don't think anyone will be able to hit Newt harder than Paul.
Prop your feet on the coffee table and get the popcorn poppin'!
And again with the surging Newt. Please, please FR, find another adjective! Newt's gotta be about surged out (Unless he takes Viagra)
Like Bob Dole? lol
I'm working on it - how do you like yours?
Joan Walsh and Eddy Schultz on the same screen.
Big brains abound.
Not too much butter, not too much salt. Just right! ;-)
(Thanks for inviting me!)
Actually, it seems MSNBC and First Read are leading the Anti-Gingrich Offensive.
Coming right up! ;o)
I like mine 'salty'... go figure...
@ WCA
You BETCHA!!!
Yet again the media's bias shines through. This article, written about Paul says:
Because they still just refuse to admit that Ron Paul, clearly the only candidate that deserves the POTUS seat, could actually win it! The numbers are in his favor, and if we can push through to win the primary, Ron Paul WILL win the white house!!!
Prohibition, the GOP establishment would never let it get to the point where Dr. Paul would get the nomination. They don't like him. They want a candidate who is one of their own.
I admire you Paul supporters, I really do. While I don't agree with most of his ideas, one thing i will say for him, he does stick to his guns and his followers are admirably loyal.
Paul doesn't have adequate funding, he doesn't have an effective campaign organization, he doesn't have the GOP's support, and he doesn't have the votes to succeed. He is just a spoiler. That's all.
Prohibition says, "The numbers are in his favor, and if we can push through to win the primary, Ron Paul WILL win the white house!!!"
Nope. Sadly, it won't happen. Newt may win Iowa, but he will never win the nomination. Why? Because Fox News gives him no love.
According to John Podhoretz (not, as far as I know, a liberal) today's Republican voters know Gingrich from his numerous appearances on Fox, not from his time in office.
From the Podhoretz article:
We remember Gingrich well. Too well. We should; we’re paid to. But we failed to take into account that most people who vote aren’t paid to and have other things to think about.
We remember him going through one of the great political flameouts of our time — first helping to engineer the 1994 GOP takeover of Congress, then resigning after the 1998 midterms.
We remember the brilliant political design of the Contract with America — and how little of it actually made it into law. That would prove to be very much the pattern with Gingrich, who loves to think in grand terms but who tends toward not grandeur as a result but grandiosity, instead.
We remember how he tarnished his own “Republican revolution” even before it started between the 1994 election and the swearing-in of the new Congress by getting himself a $4.5 million book deal (that would be $6.5 million today) — a PR blunder and possible ethics violation that backfired so badly that he had to forswear his advance.
We remember the wildly wrongheaded conviction some of us shared with him that he was powerful enough to go mano a mano with Bill Clinton in 1995 — because he and we hadn’t taken account of the fact that in his races for his House seat, he’d get 100,000 votes while Clinton in 1992 got 40 million.
We remember how that conviction led to perhaps the greatest political blunder of our time — the showdown over the budget in October 1995 that led to the three-week government shutdown and the subsequent GOP cave-in that brought the “Republican revolution” to an end only nine months after it began.
We remember how, by 1997, Republican members of Congress who had once believed they owed him everything actively plotted a coup to remove him from the speakership.
We remember the fact that he led the moralistic charge against Clinton in 1998 — notwithstanding the fact that he himself was having an extramarital affair at the time.
And we remember things from after his time in office, like how he opposed the 2006 “surge” that turned around the Iraq war.
Truth to tell, there are so many things to remember that it’s hard to remember them all. But the GOP primary voters who are considering plighting their troth to Gingrich didn’t live and breathe every moment of his time in the sun the way we did.
They know him mainly from Fox News. They know he got a Republican Congress elected, which they like the sound of. And they’ve watched him playing the debates like a piano and enjoyed themselves enormously in the process.
I was going to say Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski.
Sailcat: they were saying the same things about two other candidates in 2008: John McCain and Barack Obama.... who knew.
Would someone please explain why do people consider Paul crazy? They say he's crazy and wacko but give no evidence, like a bunch of middle schoolers name calling. I would say he's at least as grounded as the other canidates, and more so then someone like say Gingrich.
You are misinformed.
MSNBC recently called Paul's campaign the most "professional" of the group and Paul has been widely recognized of having the best ground game in both Iowa, NH, and SC. Also, Paul's supporters are the most energized of all campaigns. He has a real shot.
Finally Paul has out raised everyone but Romney and the great thing is Pau's money comes form ordinary people who believe in him. Paul also gets more money from the military than ALL other candidate combined including Obama.
Paul's campaign also has no debt.
Mr. Rogers, this may be all true, however, the sticking points are the GOP establishment does NOT want Dr. Paul to be their nominee and the crack pots of the far right base just want to hear Obama bashing, not ideas. Ergo, Dr. Paul will not be the nominee.
Yea so crazy he predicted the housing bubble caused by the GSEs and market intervention of the government, predicted the massive US deficit and inflation caused by ending the gold standard in 71, and practically predicted 911 and the police state liberty destroying policy reactions of the establishment.
If that level of accuracy in foresight is crazy I'll take some.
The success of Ron Paul's world is dependent on a having an honorable population. While Paul's world is very much on the Pollyanna side of reality, it has a very deep appeal. It would be nice if we respected each other's views, if we weren't consumed with greed, if there were no criminal element. Unfortunately, that simply isn't the case. We must have a larger government presence than Mr. Paul believes.
Because of the relative purity of his views, he has been able to hold a very consistent position all through his political career. He is not given to political expedience nor is he for sale. How can you not like that?
Who is better-suited or better-qualified to expose political mercenaries than Ron Paul? He knows first-hand of the corruption of Newt Gingrich.
I won't vote for Mr. Paul, although I agree with him on many issues, but I sure like knowing that he is true to himself, NOT to Megabuck Monstrocorp or Big Money.
I'm not saying it will be easy, but Paul supporters have learned from the past and have organized themselves deeper into local GOP organizations and have in many cases become delegates themselves. The old neo-con guard doesn't like it, but the change is happening never the less.
Now will it be enough for Ron this year... who knows... but it looks more possible than ever. If not Ron... things are looking bright for Rand in the next election cycle.
I'm not one to buy into these huge media conspiracies, but MAN!
Can someone tell me why Paul is almost completely ignored by both the left and right political media in this country? I mean, the guy is finishing 2nd, 3rd in these polls, and yet morons like Perry and Bachmann are getting 5 times the coverage, on both sides of the aisle!
What gives??
Some of what he says is nonsense, but then again, there's other aspects of him i actually agree with.
Newt or Obama? Gods help the USA either way.
"MSNBC recently called Paul's campaign the most "professional" of the group..."
It's important to note that this group was also mentioned in MSNBC as being unprepared and disorganized going into the early primaries. I am not impressed by the group, overall, and saying Paul's organization is the most "professional" of this sad lot is not saying it will be effective in taking votes away from the competition. In any case, without adequate funding and by going up against the media machines his GOP opponents have at their disposal, Paul will be overwhelmed.
What the Republicans are starting to realize is that if Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination we will have four more years of Obama. Weare voting for Ron Paul no matter what. In a recent NBC/Marist poll all of the Republicans matched up head-to-head with Obama lost, EXCEPT for Ron Paul. People need to start wising up to the facts of life.
The fact of the matter is the GOP & the Koch boys keep losing the candidates they want. Bachmann, Perry and Cain all plummetted to their death. They don't want Mitt and the don't want Newt. So who the heck do they want?
In fact, that's one of the things that Paul has going in his favor! Neither the establishment GOP nor the Koch Brothers support him! Go Dr. Paul!
Can someone tell me why Paul is almost completely ignored by both the left and right political media in this country? I mean, the guy is finishing 2nd, 3rd in these polls, and yet morons like Perry and Bachmann are getting 5 times the coverage, on both sides of the aisle!
I'll take a whack at it. The liberal media (such as it is) doesn't pay much attention to Ron Paul because they don't think he is a serious candidate. Reporters, especially political reporters, tend to talk amongst themselves quite a bit and they came to the conclusion many years ago that Ron Paul is the right wing version of Dennis Kuccinich. They may be ideologically pure but they look like they should be living in a tree baking cookies with the rest of the Keebler elves. Even if they could get past the physical appearance issue they would still not be a fit because they are ideologically pure. Neither party is ideologically pure, and a candidate that is just won't make it on the ticket.
The conservative media (and by this I mean Fox News for the most part) ignores Ron Paul because Roger Ailes told them to. They think he is a waste of their time and a spoiler. Plus, a lot of Ron Paul's positions are not what is considered "conservative."
Ron Paul is the only honest man in this race. You may not agree with him all the time but at least he is a man of integrity.
These are fair comments David and I appreciate your respect for Paul evenwith your difference in opinion. However, I would challenge your premise, that Paul's vires require a more honest society.
If you are refering to the Corporatism run amok in the US today, I beleive you coudon't be more wrong. Paul was one of the EARLIESt cirtics of Corporatist America dating in comment over 20-30 years ago. I think the challenge for people with your view is to understand where Corporatism comes from.
Corporatism is NOT the result of Free Markets gone bad. Corporatism is the result of Big Central Too Powerful government gone bad. Corporatism is an unholy alliance between the rich corporations and government. The wealthy buy influence into government which writes laws and regulations through bureaucracies that are a revolving door of former employees and promises of future benefits.
The rules almost ALWAYS restrict competition and protect the incumbents while appearing to keep them in check.
The end result is not free markets but tightly controlled ones that benefit the few at the expense of the many. This is America today.
You will NEVER regulate the greed and corruption of mankind. The more people try to regulate away corporatism the stronger it becomes because if corporatism is based on a powerful government, growing government only makes it stronger.
True free markets would have punished all the wrong doers today. The super rich would have lost TRILLIONS in bad investments and their shareholders would have never trusted them again. Instead, today these people are richer than ever… That’s corporatism for you… not free markets.
Ron Paul is a joke. If he ever got the republican nomination, Obama would win by a landslide! Ron Paul makes no sense, and before he blinked an eye, we would have more foreign countries invading us than he could count!
Get Real, Paul is way out there, and he's almost ready for the rocking chair!!
What's with this Ron Paul guy.
He wants to end the wars and spend the money in America?
What a crackpot.
We NEED these wars. Vote for Newt!
Because ALL media LEFT (MSNBC ect.) and RIGHT (FOX) depend on the illusion of the establishment two party system that desires BIG Central Government and MASSIVE spending/debt.
Also, 99% of all media is owned by 5 corporations whose PARENT companies ALL benefit from Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama foreign policy of find nation we don't control, create controversy, issue sanctions, start wars, blow things up, issue contracts to rebuild, issue oil/natural resource contracts, repeat in neighbor country.
I'll take a whack at it, too. He's too liberal for the right and too conservative for the left. Most people think of the political spectrum as being a straight line, running from left to right, and they don't know where to place Libertarians on that spectrum.
Instead, think of it as a circle, with Libertarians squeezed between the Far Right on economic issues (very, very small government, with the Market dominating all), and the left on social issues (very strict reading of the First Amendment, almost anarchical, adverse to "foreign adventures", etc.).
That's why some of us on the left agree with him on certain issues. But we won't vote for him because of what David referred to as his "Pollyanna side".
Personally Mitt Romney is the most sensible choice hes the most balanced and although he is not liked by the ultra right that makes him the most vote-able, he appeals to the middle. Gingrich on the other hand appeals but has so much baggage in the end its like shooting blind and deaf chickens. Gingrich does not exemplify Christian morals since the whole affair mess and his family values are also a nightmare. Paul would also be a logical move but some in the party are dead set against him and we know why.
As I said before there's some in the party hoping for a candidate that would be a machine arm stretch of the party but the candidates that have those qualities also have very bad character flaws with that. Just saying anybody who runs against Obama is better is not a reason to vote for them. Its like comparing Rotten apples to rotten Oranges. There are some differences but in the end there are still not edible to eat.
On a side note it always looks like the worst people always run for the office. They stay away knowing that if they run their life's story, family and everything else is going to be run into the mud and exposed. I hate this part of the election with a passion. The best people to run know well in-advance to stay away because its usually the most stressful unrewarding and the pay is a small token to the amount of crap they have to put up with.
Hmm, maybe if Paul doesn't get the gop nomination he should run as a Independent. Might be worth thinking about. Other candidates have done it in the past.
It's not going to stick. Here's why.
First, because few remember what the word conservative means, Paul is too easily dismissed as the last guy who ought to be making that charge.
Second, Republicans know Newt - he's been the point guy in their trenches. He wasn't run out of his role as speaker because he wasn't conservative enough. The charges of being recklessly undisciplined, both in his speech and his personal behavior, are the key to an effective attack on Gingrich.
Ron Paul in recent polls does better against Obama than all other GOP. In fact, Paul has the best chance at picking up the anti-war crowd and OWS crowd that is so frustrated with Obama.
Ron Paul's foreign policy is backed by decades of fact and reason. Your comments are a joke... a sad one at best.
Ron Paul - Wins Republican Nomination = Easy Obama Victory in 2012
Gingrich - Wins Republican Nomination = Landslide Victory for Obama in 2012
Romney = Wins Republican Nomination = Challenging, but Victory for Obama in 2012.
Ron Paul is crazy. Why? Because he actually wants to do something real about the deficiet? He actually wants to do something real about energy independance? He actually wants to do something real about our foreign policies?
That does make him crazy. For a politian to be working for the same goals for over 20 years is crazy, how dare he not fall in line with either the war happy mass spending, babysit the rich republicans!!! How dare he not fall in line with the war happy, mass spending redistribution of wealth democrats!!!! How dare he have his own ideas for how this country should be run.
The news doesn't cover him because niether side owns him. If they don't own him why would they help him by provdiding coverage? You want to know why I will support this man? Because he is the only politician I have ever heard of that appears to be an actual person, not just a voice piece of their political party.
OK, pizza's on the way!
Perhaps Mr. Rogers hasn't been watching the debates. Next time Paul answers a question with his "way out there answers", watch how many people are laughing at him.
He's the freak show at the circus, that keeps the entertainment element alive at the debates and helps the ratings.
sorry to say Mr. Rogers, no one takes him seriously. You don't seem to remember the 2008 Ron Paul campaign. Same score, same outcome, just a different season.
Paul would also be a logical move but some in the party are dead set against him and we know why.
Why?
He will never win the primary because the current GOP/TP is far too conservative and view many of his social views as liberal.
If this new GOP/TP focused only on the economy, budget and deficit issues, then he would be a much stronger candidate. Unfortunately this new GOP/TP is pushing a very "big government" social agenda, wanting to force more government into your personal life. This contradicts Paul's platform, and thus reduces his support.
I actually agree with Paul on many of his social issues... like getting the government completely out of the marriage business, or the cost savings and revenue potential of legalization. Unfortunately he will not get any GOP support for these issues.
Yea, Ron Paul is so dumb (sarcasm).
Read Ron Paul's ACCURATE Prediction of the HOUSING BUST 6 YEARS before it happened in 2002.
Then COMPARE those comments with Newt's 1 year before while BEING PAID to support the GSEs.
Newt Gingrich, April 24, 2007, at a meeting for Freddie Mac employees:
"Certainly there is a lot of debate today about the housing GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises], but I think it is telling that there is strong bipartisan support for maintaining the GSE model in housing. There is not much support for the idea of removing the GSE charters from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And I think it's clear why. The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system. We have a much more liquid and stable housing finance system than we would have without the GSEs. And making homeownership more accessible and affordable is a policy goal I believe conservatives should embrace. Millions of people have entered the middle class through building wealth in their homes, and there is a lot of evidence that homeownership contributes to stable families and communities. These are results I think conservatives should embrace and want to extend as widely as possible."
Ron Paul, July 16, 2002, before the House of Representatives:
"Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. This legislation restores a free market in housing by repealing special privileges for housing-related government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). These entities are the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie), and the National Home Loan Bank Board (HLBB)...
"One of the major government privileges granted these GSEs is a line of credit to the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out these GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps them attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital...
"Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges of Fannie, Freddie, and HLBB have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing...
"However, despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government’s interference in the housing market, the government’s policies of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing."
Paul may be an honest guyl - but he's a goofball! He might have been a decent President 100 years ago, but he'd get us all killed now as he wouldn't do anything even after Iran lobbed a few nukes our way!
He is out of touch with reality and the world we live in. Plus, he's just too old!
I am curious...Why doesn't Ron Paul just give the GOP the finger and run as a Libertarian?
I do not think it is MSNBC's fault that Dr. Paul has not received that much attention. It's easy for someone of subtle intelligence to look like a wall-flower in this primary pack of media whores.
How can Ron Paul be a spoiler in a race against people already so rotten???
I admit I do not know much about Ron Paul. So anyone feel free to inform me on the plus and minuses of Mr Paul.
Right now, I am sticking with President Obama and then hopefully, President Hillary Clinton.
I am very happy Mr Paul is raking mud over the efting (Look it up before you collapse me.) Newt. As a salamander, Newt are used to wallowing in the mud. I just hope he gets covered with it, alone with the arrogant often bankrupt, Trump, who blows his trumpet more, than any of the other egos, professing themselves to be qualified to be president. I cannot understand, how anyone could vote for any of the parasites the GOP has to offered. Better be careful, I see some of my best Buds have had their houses collapsed.
Ron Paul is a libertarian. He fully intends on balancing the budget by his 3rd year, greatly scale back our foreign military presence, return a great deal of resposibility of governing to the states and decriminalize drugs. You can get a full read on these and his other possitions on his website if you want to.
TO: dirp101 who wrote:
"Sailcat: they were saying the same things about two other candidates in 2008: John McCain and Barack Obama.... who knew."
You know that's not true!
Nobody EVER said that Barack Obama didn't have the funding, and still don't.
To this day, President Obama has more money in his re-election war chest than all of the Republican Candidated combined.
And even back in 2008 Barack Obama raised more money, in small sums and over the internet, than any other candidate in the history of the United States.
Geez! Can't any Republican get ANYTHING straights? No.
Alan,
People say Paul is crazy and clearly he is not but his ideas are more extreme than anyone who has ever seriously run for president. His ideas are far more radical in all directions which is easily seen by lookin at his platform when he ran for president as a Libertarian. The major influences he cites in developing his political and economic philosophy are: Murray Rothbard and Hanz Sennholz are his economic pole stars advocating the work of Ludwig von Mises and the Austrian School of Economics who don't believe in economic modeling or statistical predicators. Rothbard who died in 95 was the Father of Free Market Anarchism or anarchocapitalism which is radical in extremis he also espoused many racist views (Paul disagrees).
Dr. Paul wants a return to the old standard which shows almost a delusional understanding of where we are economically. (Nixon took us off the gold standard) He does not believe in taxation which is idiotic. He would end social security, medicaire and medicaide as soon as possible and sell all federal hihways to private industry.
The list is endless, His philosophy is libertarian utopian and would bankrupt us and probably put us into a state of Civil War almost immediately.
jkh
Mr. Rogers.,
Good to see you, once again, making clear, concise, and truthfull statements about Dr. Paul. I for the life of me don't understand why he is not 100% in ALL polls. Even the so called "progressives" have reason to embrace his values. While Obama, and the rest of the establishment Republicans continually sell America down the river, Dr. Paul is the only candidate that truely loves America, and stands for the values our Constitution swore to uphold. ALL the rest have sworn their loyalty to AIPAC, and not America. Nice showing in the Oaklahoma Straw Poll recently, as well!
And we think Obama has a hard time getting anything done?? Imagine a Paul Administration, where BOTH parties refuse to work with him!
Carter would look like the Wizard of Washington, by comparison.
A video for all you hardcore dems still voting for Obama:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5V-_foMkK8
Ron Paul is the crazy uncle in the room, just when you think he might be normal he says something crazy and everybody takes a double look as if to say did he really say that. Ron Paul is entertaning to listen to but I would definitley not want him making decisions for the better of the country.
I was a big Obama supporter, and I still am. Although I gotta admit, Ron Paul has definitely got my attention.
Only problem is that if he were to get elected, the obstructionists would make the last three years look like the Peace Corps.
Heck, I might even vote for him.
Sure, people are all going to vote to reelect Obama! After all, they're all enjoying the hell out of unemployment, worthless home values, tax increases, high gas prices, high food prices, suicidal government spending, a powder keg stock market, government owned auto companies, and being told what they can eat, drink, and drive. Life is good!
The discussion on Ron Paul has been enjoyable. Like liberals and other Independents, I like many things about Ron Paul, with the assumption that only his viable views could ever become a reality because of checks and balances in our governmental system. After all, Dr. Paul makes a good congressman as well as Dennis Kucinich, a representation of all views, right?
However, Rand is no Ron Paul, most of all in terms of doing his homework and being as knowledgeable and logical. Like other Teabaggers, Rand is incompetent and needs to be replaced.
In the meantime, I will vote FOR reelection of President Obama and FOR the betterment of our nation. I will also be voting against any Republican, because any of the GOP/TP candidates would be a nightmare.
Ron Paul….Sir, you’ve remained on course all along, a rare property for a politician…I salute you.
Spider: All thanks to the GOP/TP in Congress today.....we can't go forward until we do something, but they won't allow it!
Ron Paul has some good ideas and some which are just plain unrealistic in todays world (mind you the rest put together have no ideas and no idea). Unfortunately as we have seen over the last 3 years the President can not just come in and wave his magic wand and change things, America is like an aircraft carrier with a very wide turning circle. So while Paul would like to, say sell all US Intestate Highways to private industry....who in private industry would buy them, considering the state most are in, the cost of maintenance, putting up tolling positions etc would make that unprofitable therefore nonviable to private industry....so is it a good idea, no, it is idealistic but not realistic. That sums up Ron Paul and why people describe him as "crazy" I am sure he is not and he would make a great counsel but his idealism outweighs his realism and therefore makes him unelectable in a Presidential Election and even probably in the primary. Most people who are going to vote don't vote on idealism.
Ron Paul as President would not get one of his idealistic views past Congress, he knows that but he is taking the moral high ground and is prepared to live with that. His supporters see the idealism (that's the way it is in Mr. Rogers Neighborhood) but block out the realism and cling to the hope that someone will come along and fix everything.....not going to happen.
Until such a time as we can get politics out of government and we get a group of people in public office that put the whole of America (and Australia) first and their own self interest second we are going to wallow in this mire for awhile. The Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves (I can hear it), even my Father would be bewildered by what is going on at the moment....a dog and pony show primary between some of the most selfish people I have ever had the displeasure of knowing about.
True Patriot:
You are to be commended for your restraint. Rather than sully your warm approach to this subject, allow me to report the unvarnished truth. Rand Paul is just plain stupid. As a matter of fact, he is scary stupid.
Why did the moderator collapse "
So, Bluto has started the FOOD FIGHT with the poppin fresh dough boy!
Will 'the' Donald come to his rescue?
Can Calista save her 'main' squeeze?"?
I don't see the problem. I think it is quite humorous.
Ron P should run as a Libertarian. He is not a Republican.
He might actually get some independent votes if he did.
While Ron Paul's body lives in the 21st century, his brain and political philosophy live in the 19th century and never the twain shall meet. A tiny little federal government was fine for an agrarian society in a country of 80 million people but a disaster for the complexities of a country with 300 million people in a world economy. A return to the gold standard? Why not a return to outdoor plumbing and gas lights? Get rid of all federal agencies? Sure, why not? We don't need federal anti-lynching laws (middle 1930"s) just like we don't need federal civil rights laws. Leave it to the states, I'm sure they'll do it right.
I like many people on this thread can agree with much of what Paul says and appreciate his honesty and obvious integrity. But to read and understand his positions on all the issues facing this country leaves me shaking my head and even more convinced that both Paul and his idiot son Rand are indeed living in another century, men out of time.
Ron Paul 1896!!!
It makes sense that the libertarian candidate would be the one most opposed to Newt Gingrich.
I can't think of any other "history professor" that benefits more from the ignorance of his fellow countrymen than Newt. Once people (especially Republicans) are reminded of who Newt is it will be over.
"Once people (especially Republicans) are reminded of who Newt is it will be over."
That seems logical, but this is the party of False Prophets and like most cults, the truth isn't relevant. It seems that they are being driven by their hatred of anything Obama. Satan could win the Republican nomination just by telling the people what they want to hear.
And there is why Dr. Paul will not survive the primaries to be the GOP nominee. He won't play their game. As I posted above, I may not agree with Rep. Paul, but at least he doesn't try to play to the crowd and sticks to his ideals. Something the rest of the GOP field could learn from.
Jake, I thought Satan was the VP from 2000 till 2008? Can he run again?? :)
Fuzzy;
The 'Dick' can run as far as the extension cord will allow him to...
Karma really is a bitch! ;o)
@fuzzy
LOL. Great post!
@Feisty
At least "Dick" isn't surging!
Ron Paul will win "a" nomination. If it isn't the Republican nomination he will most certainly will win the Americans Elect nomination. He will be on the ballot in all 50 States. If the Republicans want to play Russian Roulette it's fine by me.
Give it a rest! - Do you have any longtime liberal friends? If you do you may want to repeat this line to them, "If it isn't the Republican nomination he will most certainly will win the Americans Elect nomination. He will be on the ballot in all 50 States. If the Republicans want to play Russian Roulette it's fine by me." Then, once you've made your comment, ask them about Ralph Nader and what they learned from the 2000 election.
@Give it a rest!
Ron Paul will NOT win the nomination. Paul wants to end foreign aid and keep the tax dollars in America.
The guy is a moron, vote for Newt!
Compare Newt's and Paul's comments on housing.
Note the dates of these quotes — Gingrich was speaking shortly before the mortgage meltdown, while Ron Paul's remarks were made in 2002, when very few people even knew there was a housing bubble.)
Newt Gingrich, April 24, 2007, at a meeting for Freddie Mac employees:
"Certainly there is a lot of debate today about the housing GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises], but I think it is telling that there is strong bipartisan support for maintaining the GSE model in housing. There is not much support for the idea of removing the GSE charters from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And I think it's clear why. The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system. We have a much more liquid and stable housing finance system than we would have without the GSEs. And making homeownership more accessible and affordable is a policy goal I believe conservatives should embrace. Millions of people have entered the middle class through building wealth in their homes, and there is a lot of evidence that homeownership contributes to stable families and communities. These are results I think conservatives should embrace and want to extend as widely as possible."
Ron Paul, July 16, 2002, before the House of Representatives:
"Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. This legislation restores a free market in housing by repealing special privileges for housing-related government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). These entities are the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie), and the National Home Loan Bank Board (HLBB)...
"One of the major government privileges granted these GSEs is a line of credit to the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out these GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps them attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital...
"Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges of Fannie, Freddie, and HLBB have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing...
"However, despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government’s interference in the housing market, the government’s policies of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing."
Ron Paul is the one to vote for. Ending foreign aid and keeping the dollars in the USA is the BEST THING FOR OUR COUNTRY. So is drug reform and the whittling down of the government. All plans of Ron Paul's for getting our country out of it's mess. VOTE RON PAUL
Yeah. You wouldn't want your children to no be maimed and killed in the middle of some foreign desert cause there is a terrorist there that hates your freedom.
Or to have transparency in how your money is spent.
You are right, JB But anyone running against Booger Head might be a change for the best. We must take the "checkbook" away from Bama and then we may not pull out of this slump. I just retired with over 30 years from SBC and I have NEVER seen an economy like this one. Bama can blame someone else for 3 or 4 years but that old dog won't hunt anymore. The best chance our nation has to heal is for American citizens to "pull together" and not let a bunch of politicians divide us. When we are scrapping and cussing is what they like the best.
Ron Paul is a nut that is backed by Arab interests and pot heads. When I hear him talk I think of coo coo clocks.
Well said. No matter how you polish them they are both still turds.
Your comment makes you look like a coo coo clock.
I wouldn't call Paul a Libertarian. He's against the First Amendment and the Civil Rights Act. He's just a moderate Republican.
Too many big words? Too much truth? I would try to argue with logic but I think that might fly over your head.
@Mosin "Backed by Muslim interests and pot heads". LOL!!! You are in your own world! Ron Paul is looking out for OUR interests. We need to cut all foreign aid, bring our troops home, return to sound money, balance the budget and reform "entitlements". Get a clue Mosin.
Ron Paul has moments of intellect but they are few and far between. He is like the crazy uncle who has moment of sanity then pops off a one liner that has everyone shaking their head. He is not electable though it could be fun to see him in a higher office.
Newt on the other hand is electable and has become more of a statesman in since running for office this time around. He is a smart guy and has some great analogies that I like though he has baggage i believe he will be the nominie and will handily beat Obama any day we have the election.
The idea behind having Ron Paul run this add and not Romnie is a good political move and will temporarily keep Romnie out of the fray. If you take what Glenn Beck is saying (though he hasn't endorsed anyone) Romnie is the only candidate who has the ability to win handily and move the country in a positive way. To me Glenn Beck is an LDS homer. If you are LDS you are a good guy. If you are not LDS you lack the insight and judgement needed for his allegence. So Romnie will have Glenn Becks vote.....but Newt is the going to win the nomination.
Pity that the collapse artists are out again and that the first string disappeared. No matter, Newt is a philandering crook and if that's who the GOP want to select as their candidate I guess that they will have to trample over Dr. Paul and a few others before Newt gets the ticket.
Stained GAP dresses in the Oval office was bad enough; now it'll be the promise of stained neon spandex and dirty money that the GOP will try to lure the independent voters to accept.
Ron has been in elected office for a great many years, that hints at electability. He is the only challanger with people who actually support him. Newt and Mitt people just don't want Obama, reason why they jump to a new person every month. Ron is the only politician who wants to do something real for this country, elimiate the deficiet and start paying back this dept. End these needless wars and focus on stopping threats at home. Have congress do their job and declare war (not done in 60+ years) before sending our people to fight. Give you the choice of how to live your life, and reasserting the rights of states to rule.
He isn't bought and paid for, they only candidate that can thruthfully say that. For this reason people are scared of him. The media won't cover him, his party rejects him and the opposition ignores him. If he wins the nomiation it might just wake up the establishment that we want actual change, if he doesn't the number of write in votes should accomplish the same thing. We need the country to move forwards not remain on the same spend happy, invade every country that looks at us funny attitude.
miss nina ... you and a lot of folk are still trying to sugar coat the mess Bush left this country in!!! The mess you are in ... is his mess. If Obama hasn't had enough true grit to pull us out of it ... then just say so ... but don't show your ignorance by blaming Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"Paul said Grinch will be lynched"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Those who call Ron Paul "crazy" can never give reason WHy they think he's crazy. it's just an ad hominem attack used by the desperate establishment, who is losing their grip on the minds of Americans more every day.
RON PAUL OR NONE AT ALL
And DELEGATES DELEGATES DELEGATES! Make sure you vote for the right delegates. In many states the popular vote means NOTHING. The delegates decide everything! NO DELEGATES, NO RON PAUL.....look into the delegate process in your state and consider becoming one....but don't tell the party leaders who you support....
Glenn Beck, why do you disturb the dead. I am so glad he left FOX, for whatever reason. In my mind he is dead and buried. He speaks his trash about the common man, yet he lives in one of the most affluent communities in the US. He is a multi millionare, charging ungodly amounts for people to hear him spew his lies. I said this before and I will say it again Beck is in serious need of some psych intervention. Right on about Newt, he will hopefully win the nomination. Rommney was the governor of my state, he is a flaming liberal republican. Mass health care he defends. We have the same penalty the OB's plan has, if you refuse to have health care you lose your Mass state tax exemption. What is the difference from the Fed plan coming down the pike. He was pro choice,now he is prolife. Don't think you can have it both ways. If I remember, his lawn maintenance contractor employed illegals. Both ways again. I don't think so.
OK.. how about we vote simply based on the record. How can you possibly vote for ANYONE other than Dr. Paul.
Simply and ONLY on their records.
He wins.
What else are you guys thinking of when you vote?... and why?
Another way to look at it. Vote for the most HONEST person. Again... Paul wins.
Lies. Honesty.
why vote for liars?
New't & trump calling Paul & huntsman "Joke Candidates", These two Clowns just lost Iowa. The people of Iowa are pissed. Two Crooks trying to set up the debate so Grinch wins, this is sad.
No, the main source of anti-Gingrich is coming from the Liberals and the Liberal media:
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) sharply criticized former speaker of the House and Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich Wednesday, following comments Gingrich made in October suggesting the House member should be in jail for the economic crisis: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/17/newt-gingrich-freddie-mac-barney-frank_n_1099393.html
Mrs. Pelosi declares she has "potentially-damaging information.....on Newt Gingrich": http://www.wfmz.com/news/Pelosi-ready-to-tell-all-on-Gingrich/-/121458/4879914/-/ur8vrv/-/index.html
David Axelrod offered up a rare jab at Newt Gingrich, who has shot to the top of state and national polls over a stagnant Romney: http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/david-axelrod-offers-rare-democratic-attack-on-newt-gingrich.php
David Gregory blasts Gingrich: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/david-gregory-newt-gingrich%e2%80%99s-comments-on-poor-people-are-%e2%80%98a-grotesque-distortion%e2%80%99/
And the White House is reserving the right to attack once Gingrich secures the Republican nomination:
Bottom line: doesn't matter who is "leading the Republican race", the attacks will be targeted on the leader.
Chicago politics at it's finest.
At Fuzzy 44 - VERY funny, but remember, Satan was actually president, so, no, he can't run again.
I just love to read about / or to see news clips (regardless) of the network that talk about Gingrich or Trump as serious candidates...I would add Cain to the list, but well you know...
Gingrich IS a serial liar. Trump is an orange touped blow hard. Cain is an ego-maniac with an affectation for hats, a twisted Don Juan complex, and an apparent love of Pokemon. NONE of them has the gravitas or the self control to be the leader of the free world and be taken seriously. Why do Republicans do this to themselves? And could someone please help me understand how Ron Paul could be a Libertarian, but in favor of "restricting abortion rights" while he peppers Iowa with TV spots about Gingrich's hypocracy? Seriously?
Feisty and crew,
You and your partisan friends are the prime example of what is wrong with this country and the current leadership. You all pose and point and name call just to attract attention to yourselves without looking seriously at the complete failures in leadership you support.
Both sides of the isle are the same side of the coin... the me first coin. You and you buds could care less about the center of this nation as you dive head long into both fringes of the left and right. Give it a rest and grow up. Study the issues, leadership qualities, and look for leadership who know what statesmanship means. Until then please temper your name calling impulses...they just display ignorance on real issues or solutions.
Don't try to tell me the Democrats are doing a great job. They had two years of complete control of the House, Senate, and Presidency but could not balance the budget, reform tax law, reform campaign finance law, deny themselves a raise in pay and benefits, reform banking laws, reform the losses in civil freedoms lost to the Patriot Act. The list of atrocities leads right to the leaders in the Democrats who helped convince the nation of the need to wage war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Read their own quotes in the run up to both wars and tell me they were not telling the country to go to war.
President Obama lacks any leadership credentials whatsoever. During his term as a Senator he accomplished nothing .... this is being mirriored by his presidency.
@ carrot top in Roselle, Il,
I enjoy your posts, but by the time I can read them, since I don't live and sleep by my computer they are always collapsed by the time I can read any of them.. Quit dat... LOL
Please tell your MSNBC boss to lighten up..Thank You..
dano
Anyone that votes for Newt is crazy. Do some research before ya stand behind someone. It was driving me crazy every one was starting to lean towards Cain. Jeeze he worked for the federal reserve in Alanta. He sat on the board there.
There is only one guy out there that defends the constitution and bill of rights. The rest are tearing it to pieces because of 911. We are overseas fighting. Our borders are not secure. Lol hell someone pissed use off or they wouldnt have busted 35 tons of weed in and under ground tunnel that went from mexico to the US. Now what if that was some of the nukes russia lost at one time. We need to fix America first. Then worry about the rest of the world
Notsosure10 ... you have enough nerve to complain about "Name Calling" while part of "Your Crew" writes "Booger Head" & "Bama" ............
PLEASE just apologize for Bush and move on ...........
You people on the right can't blame Liberals. Your pretenders are eating each other alive. Do you want the stuffed suit with zip for ideas, (Romney) the Ayn Rand male clone, (Paul), or the thief that doesn't care who knows he a thief, (Gingrich). There's always "The Fruitcake Lady", & the Moderate. Cain and Perry are just taking up space in your every other day debate.
Newscover, I am very sorry for Bush, he was a terrible president and really screwed up this country both domestically and abroad. He lit a room on fire and left it for Obama to put out. Unfourtunaly, over the past three years, we have seen the President either feed the flames, or just ignore the problem and let the fire spread. Whenever anyone askes him about it, his reply is always the same, "I didn't lit the fire." Which is very true, but he was hired to put it out, which he has not done. I am past the point of caring how it started, I just want it put out before it burns everything down, and I have 0 confidence that Obama is willing to do that.
midleman ... good for you ... and you forgot to write that the Republicans are fighting him all the way!!!
I am just so sick and tired of the GOP folks blaming this mess on Obama when it falls squarely on their shoulders!!! And then have the nerve to try and force us to stomach one of these buffoons they are now trying to dish out!!!! Have they no shame????
Here's this for all you Ron Paul lovers; Ron Paul couldn't pour piss out of boot, if the instructions were written in the heel.
Ron Paul is correct. Newt Gingrich is a worse flip-flopper than Romney. People keep forgetting that he was the politician who started the division in Congress, and now he is saying that "Congress should work together"
All that Ron Paul needs is to show some news from LAST YEAR when Gingrich was being such a "buddy" with Al Sharpton and others, kissing A**** and trying to see what he could get to his benefit. He is just another delusional scumbag in denial.
If Ron Paul does not win the nomination, at least he is not making an A*** of himslef, being the laughing stock of the country, just like Cain, Trump, Perry, Bachman, Santorum and now Gingrich.
What a group! They all should be on Saturday night instead of running for President!
Who would you rther elect? The wise old owl? or the serial adulterer, or maybe the used car salesman with the nice hair? The lows you people will sink to just to desperatley defend your pathetic leader disgusts me. I spit at you
Analogies are entertaining but the situation is not a room on fire. Nor is it just a few years of Bush. It is a Republican party that has been owned more and more by the fanatical right ever since Reagan started his attack on government and regulation in general. It took Bush to bring it to fruitation but nobody should be expected to fix it in three years against a Republican electorate that doesn't care about anything except making Obama fail.
If ron paul is CRAZY, newt is a child molester....hes aways talking about kids
JH,
How the hell does that add to the conversation?!?! Thanks I feel much more "enlightened" by that mindless comment.
JH,
How the hell does that add to the conversation?!?! Thanks I feel much more "enlightened" by that mindless comment.
You hit the nail on the head Mike ... and to think ... they tried to push Palin on us ... is she making a fool out of them ... better them than the whole country!!!
@Woman Voter
I am a woman and pro choice, but you have to look at the big picture here. Is it more important that abortion be available in all states (Dr. Paul would like it to be a states right issue) or that are country is in a recession and in multiple wars that we can't win? Paul is the only honest candidate that is willing to bring our troops home and tackle our finical problems. He is not a hypocrite, his is a OBGYN and he believes life starts at conception.
Please do not discount the man on such a trivial issue.
It's find and dandy to say "it should be a state issue" and a person from the south would REALLY be happy with that!!! If it were left to the "states" we would still have segregation in the south!!! Sometimes being over simplistic is a fault! Ron is guilty of this quite often and is the reason his good points are overlooked!!!
RON PAUL 2012
To hell with Newt fulla Poop. That's all he is and will ever be. Newt is a sellout and will flip-flop to the highest bidder in the 1%. He's not to be trusted, and he shouldn't be a congressman either along with batty Bachmann and all the others.
RON PAUL 2012
@newscover: I think you are over simplifying it. Under Jim Crow laws segregation was enforced, unconstitutionally. The market left alone won't allow segregation. Try opening a no blacks allowed store, especially in the south. How long do you think you would stay in business? And on the abortion topic, states rights may be a good compromise.
How about irresponsibly dumping toxic chemicals to save money. If the EPA is removed, how long until this lovely practice becomes an industry standard again?
Ever read "The Jungle"?
How long do pharmaceutical companies need to adhere to making sure they don't release the next Vioxx or blatantly make stuff up about what their medication is supposed to do without an FDA? Do you want to make pharmaceuticals a buyer-beware market? Would you want to be that guinea pig?
How about collusion? Would you be ok with Ford, GM, Toyota and Shell working out a deal where they have a proprietary nozzle on the pumps so that you can only buy gas from certain stations...how good of a price do you think you would get?
Do you like the product tying that your cable/satellite company does by bundling programming you like with a number of other ones you can't stand.
ldo you do realize that all you did was help Dr. Paul right?
Dr. Paul isn't "removing" them he's giving them back to state's rights where they belong why is that so hard to understand?
Ron Paul has talked incessantly about removing or reducing the effectiveness of numerous federal regulatory agencies!
So state's rights all the way then?
How do you think states that kowtow to big business will respond? Will they get strict with heavy polluters, or will they be looser than federal standards?
I tend to think that considering the political climate already in Delaware and Texas, if the state is the only stop-gap to prevent unethical behavior and heavy polluting, you may as well just consider leaving the barn door open and watch those regions (and others like them) plunge into a polluted region similar to industrial regions in China.
Customers do not dictate such ancillary things as pollution, ethical practices, etc. Those are things that we expect from a company that does business. If no one has to uphold the standard, the industry as a whole will go to the lowest common denominator of customer demands. Sure, small/niche companies will brag about their ethical/responsible practices, but the Walmarts, Haliburtons, Pfizers, et al of the world won't bother and just enjoy the additional profits they make by not having to operate ethically/responsibly
Additionally, regarding collusion and consumer protections, we expect that when we enter into a contract with a company, that I don't need a lawyer on a $100,000/year retainer to review every sentence before one considers signing! Additionally, I don't know about you, but I think both you and Ron Paul completely disregard the looming threat of what massive monopolization and collusion have on the "free market".
Notsosure10, if you can read this, THANK YOU for 2.3
Ron Paul will be gone in the first 3 months! Bye Old man shouting at cloud!!
Don't be so quick to go there...Ron Paul's displayed more intellectual honesty in this campaign than all the other GOP candidates combined. It's just a shame that he's trying to win this party's nomination.
And Ron Paul was one of the first to really use the social media to promote his candidacy. The college kids love him
as does the military. Ron Paul may very well be the last uncorrupted person in Washington.
I would hope that Newt will be discarded with the trash and then there is Huntsman and Paul. It could end up being Huntsman/Paul 2012 and that isn't a bad thing.
Right now, from what I have seen of the Republican offerings, the dog catcher has more smarts, ability and likability than what's out there. I regret that I must stoop to this level, but I've rolled my eyes at Republican comments so many times, my eye sockets hurt. I've turned to my daughter and said, "She really didn't say that did she?" or "He wants to do what with our children?" or "God chose him?" or "She can see what from her home?" Puhleeeze, people. We need reality in this country, and playing games and just saying stupid stuff isn't going to make it.
I'm not all that enthused with Paul. He's got some things going for him, but not enough oars in the water to get up any speed. Obama isn't cutting it, either. His one saving grace is that he has three years of experience on the job, and he has a better grasp of what's happening. Now, if he will start acting on it appropriately, we might have something to go with.
We are in a heap of trouble right now, and it's going to take someone who has a firm foundation in how things really work to save us (from ourselves, for starters!) I don't think the dogcatcher could do any worse.
@Jake
IMO Huntsman is setting himself up for name recognition for the 2016 campaign.
phinepahancy, that could be, but I think Huntsman could take Obama with the right VP, someone with a brain. And that brings me to McCain, if only he had selected a VP with credentials.
@Jake
I never did figure out the Palin thing. And, like with Dr. Paul, the GOP far right base is not in the mood to be rational, so no to Jon Huntsman.
Huntsman / Paul ticket is the only rational option left for the GOP. And maybe not such a bad option for the rest of the country.
Huntsman/Paul would be a good thing.
Phinephancy,
I agree I think Huntsman is setting himself up for 2016 and doing so rather humbly which is refreshing. That's what I have always liked about the guy.
Hold on tight Folks, and here we goooooo............ It's coming up a storm!!
A REAL $#it storm.
This bunch of whiney, bitchy kids is ready to fight it out tooth and nail. The winners will feast on the losers. I can hardly wait!
What's with all this peace crap? War IS peace. If you haven't learned that from Bush & Obama then you need to listen harder.
Probably half the Paul supporters are Dems in disguise.
Love your sarcasm JungleBoogie!!! I think some on here are missing it!
Rep. Paul KNOWS he can win in IOWA. He has a truckload of funds, the best, most committed and deepest organization in the state, and the fall of the previous "front-runners" has left him in a position he couldn't have imagined even a month ago.
He hates Newt. He was with him when Newt was in power in Washington and wasn't fond of him then. If he can win in Iowa and derail Newton in the precess, it will be a bonus for him, and I am predicting that he will win Iowa...
Actually I can see Rep. Paul winning Iowa, but if I had to guess I'd say that would be his only win during this campaign season.
Why? Because he doesn't get a lot of love on Fox News.
Say what you will about Ron Paul, but IMO he has not only thought about his positions, he actually believes them. That is more than I can say for many of the political opportunists and know-nothings on the Republican ticket this year.
@nisl
Ron Paul 'believes' them. What a joke.
That's why presidents have 'advisors' and 'lobbyists', that way they don't have to think about things all the time. Other people can think FOR them.
So what if Paul thinks about the issues, who cares?
Vote Newt!
Hey Jungle - can you come up with any other politician in the past 30 years that has a 100% constitutional voting record?
Know what? Make it 60 years.
wtf is the Constitution? i thought this country was run by corporations.
ron paul gets my vote, anyone else is pos, u guys that like newt are funny, why would u respect a man that kiss trumps ass, goes where the money is. newt doesnt care about you. hes all for the money!
i just can't understand newt lovers, truly the most brain washed people follow him
*She turned me into a newt!*
...
...
Got bettah
What a tangled web of idiots we have in Iowa. None of them will beat Obama.
Obama, also known as "George Bush II"?
Even Snooki could beat Obama.
Ron Paul's pretty good and Jon Huntsman ain't half bad either. Obama doesn't have to win if either of these two gets the nomination.
Iowa here, Royalstar...who precisely are you calling "idiot"?
Here's the skinny...I've been caucusing since '92. I've been a platform comittee chair and a delegate (twice).
I have seen both sides of the fence, and have come to know both Republican and Democrat Rep.s in my state. Most are fair and reasonable folks (with only a couple of exceptions). I would like to remind you that while the fringe groups seem to occupy the media these days..(BTW,it is NOT our fault!) your average Iowan is taking it all with a grain of salt.
The majority of us like to keep our cards close to our face, avoid the 3 ring circus that are "the primaries".
When the time comes, rest assured that Iowa will weigh the options carefully, and vote accordingly.
Or do I owe you an apology......
Well at least you're not Florida.
Miami for Buchanan 2012!!!
The Republican Party is tearing itself apart before our eyes - nice!
Sure, let GOP contenders do themselves the dirty deeds. That will make it easier for Obama's team to nail the coffin. Keep it up guys.
One thing is for sure, Whomever gets the GOP nod, won't have too many skeletons left in their closet. They're digging up a lot of DIRT on each other.
Dear President Obama,
Please sit back and enjoy yourself. the republicans are doing all the hard work for you! :)
Should Obama win in 2012, the GOP might have to look at splitting into separate political parties. The intellectual, moderate conservative party and the Tea Party.
With the way the GOP/TP is divided right now, I can see why their "A" tier candidates are sitting this one out. I think they are really looking forward to 2016. I do believe the real goal of the GOP is control of both houses of Congress, and the presidency is just the side show.
To see the GOP of old again will take a long time. They've been hijacked by the very extreme fanatics. They make a moderate un- republican. A purist party where the truth is never told rather they'll idolize anyone who's sheepish and can repeat bumper sticker talks.
I agree with phineohancy - I seriously believe this is all a show. The GOP is deliberately throwing the election.
Good for Ron Paul. Newt has a serious personality disorder and he's just a whore.
How soon we forget the bitter infighting of the Democratic Party in 2008.
@OHC
Newt is NOT a whore. Newt is a family values candidate with heart.
Look at Ron Paul walking away from his cancer stricken wife - THAT'S heartless.
Ummm....family values? which one of newt's x-wives will back you on that?
@Jungleboogie -
I'm sorry but wasn't Newt Gingrich the one that was having an affair on his first wife and wanted to discuss divorce terms in the hospital while she was recovering from surgery. Sounds like a family values candidate with a LOT of heart.
Looking past his personal life (which is full of heartlessness, not just infidelity) and at his policies, Newt Gingrich is one of the worst choices available. He's there to screw you over--deliberately.
Good old Newt, he was having an affair on his first wife with his second wife and then turn about is fair play happened to his second wife because he started having an affair with his third wife on his second wife.
Family values are words that the American people value. Candidates use them because we like to hear them, candidates have no clue to what they mean.
Exactly!!! I would not vote for any of those idiots! The worst one in the lot is Newt!!!! Whoever votes for him must have rose colored glasses!!!!
The only thing these candidates are good for, are pimples on Satans Ass
Didn't Hillary and Barack attack each other four years ago? If a candidate was required by law to run only on accomplishments rather than attacking. What would the Democrats do for their campaigns?
could it be that the left wing( main stream) media is pumping up the goofballs to make the repubs look bad?
does anyone seriously think that Bachman, Perry, Cain and now Gingrinch are presidential material? Seems like the media suddenly announces that there is a new front runner and then spends the next several weeks digging up dirt. meanwhile serious candidates without tons of baggage get no coverage ( Huntsman, Paul )
In a perfect world Huntsman or Paul would be the best choice, whether they would be able to get anything done is another story. Obama is turning out to be GWB lite with a strong penchant for Unions and Govt employees, but I repeat myself...
So you think that the mythical left wing media is to blame for the group of misfits being put forward as presidential contenders? These folks volunteered, they were not drafted. They're yours, be proud.
Except that Ron Paul doesnt have any skeletons in his closet, he has the Constitution, and mabe Thomas Jefferson's ghost or something.
If you can find dirt on Ron Paul, everyone will be amazed.
I disagree with you KYM. They aren't wearing rose colored glasses, they are wearing blinders!
To those who don't know,
Jungle is messing with you and being sarcastic... kind of funny people can't see that. Paul has been with his wife since 1957. Newt left his cancer stricken wife. Jungle knows this... well played Jungle.
Ron Paul's wife is also his highschool sweetheart. They have been together for a very long time.
Newt's wife however....which one is his current wife?
Callista is Newt's current skank. He was involved with her while his second wife, Marianne, was undergoing cancer treatments. He met Marianne while he was married to his first wife, by the way. Newt is not a loyal or trustworthy partner.
Good for Paul, I don't like his economic pure liberatarian policies or ideas, but he always speaks his mind. Gingrich is the ultimate Washington insider making and cutting deals and speaking out of both sides of his mouth dependent on the audience. He agreed with science of climate change, now he doesn't, supported the individual mandate not he doesn't, agreed with Cap and Trade now he doesn't, villified Freddie Mac all while banking millions from them...the list goes on.
Again I don't agree with Paul on economic issues but wholely support him on foreign policy. The Congressman trumps Obama's escalations of foreign policy in my book. Paul is the exact opposite to Gingrich he tell what he believes no matter the consequences. Doesn't matter who he is talking to either. The guy has character.
By the way, can anyone in Iowa caucus for Paul. Iowa democrats would be smart to help give Paul the win in Iowa. Hoping everyone Democrats included vote for Paul, they can switch back to Obama for the general.
In 2008 we were deluged with Republicans voting in our Democratic Primary, they voted primarily for Clinton were I was working. First time during a primary our election table was busy, the Repubs were sitting on their hands for a change.
I was a democrat but i switched so i could vote for Ron Paul and i know several other people that are doing the same thing.I would not be so quick to rule out him.as far as the media is concerned we should take note of the fact of how they have treated Paul.That makes me just that more determined to vote for him. GO RON PAUL.
So Iowa only allows Republicans to vote in a Republican primary. Thanks for the information. Dr. Paul is principled another thing I like about him. The media should give him a fairer shake.
In Texas, primaries are open, you can vote for whoever no matter party affiliation. I am a democrat no one is running here, but I'm a yellow dog democrat - the saying goes "They would rather vote for a yellow dog then a Republican"... So I can only say good luck with your choice and your vote, Ted.
Yellowdogs are not too keen to viewpoints differing from traditional democratic principles and will even call out other democrats when they stray from core principles. Their reputation as course and unswerving, principled loyalists has not helped to win them any popularity contests.
From yellowdog democrat.com
Yellowdog democrats and hippies. Vote for Obama or Newt!
This idiot Ron Paul is anti-war, why in hell would you want that?
Ron Paul is anti-war. Your statement is very simplistic. He agrees that we have the right to defend ourselves just as other countries have the right to defend themselves. What he is stating is that the so called War on Terror is an unwinnable exercise using the military to fight in an asymmetrically battle. We have hundreds of thousands of troops around the world providing targets for our enemies. Rather it would be better suited to use intelligence and our myriad of national security agencies to protect against terrorism.
Read the book "American Hubris" if you ever get the chance.
I believe Ron Paul believes most of what he says. While I respect him for that, I think his economic, currency, and role of modern government policies in today's world are totally out of place. Additionally, the office of the President is a very weak one, relative to the Congress, and today, even the Supreme Court. I, along with most, enjoy the the give and take speculative to our campaign seasons, yet, if any really wish to change the direction of the country, then it must be done at the Congressional level. Republicanism is, and historically always has been, a creed or belief of "lockstep intertwinement of the Executive and Congress. This system has served that party well toward perverting our republic to a Plutocratic dynasty which is, and has been, the aim and general purpose of the republican party since It's inception. Eisenhower would arguably be my only exception. Democratic party, while populated with many more crooked than a dogs hind leg, have historically at least, been much more hell raisingly attuned to populist persuasions of their particular constituents, which allows for much more uproar, and often, glaring deficiencies, all though, displays of democracy at work. I contend this is needed to right our country, and to do it, we must have more democrats, and fewer republicans in Congress.
Thank you Mac Forrester! I have been saying to anybody who will listen that it is not the president who is going to make change as it is Congress!! If you want change then you better start looking good and hard at who you vote into Congress!!!
I won't do as others, so if your reading this looking for name calling you won't be happy. Ron Paul has been belittled, ignored, and marginalized, by the media. He is called crazy, unelectable and not a team player by other republicans. Most Americans are treated like this by the media and government, myself included. Ron Paul speaks his mind, and holds fast to his oath of office to "serve" the American people and defend the constitution. He wants to curtail the massive foreign aid America gives out. I agree. Why shouldn't other countries support themself. Ron Paul wants to bring our troops home. I agree. America should defend America. We shouldn't be trying to police the whole world. Ron Paul wants to end the war on drugs. I agree. The war on drugs has been an utter failure. Prohibition didn't work either and we had the common sense to stop that. The media keeps saying that Ron Paul can't win. I think what they are really saying is we don't want him to win. The rich keep getting richer and the laws are only for the poor. Congress gets to do insider trading, wall street get to commit fraud, and the media tells us all to look the other way. I'm for Ron Paul, Ron Paul is for me...
Gary, no need to apologize for your views. VERBALLY ERUPT with them to everyone you know. There are a great many, still, that love America, and for what it USED to stand for: Hard work, common scence, accountability, and supporting local community.
Let the entertainment begin!
Newt Gingrich presents problem for conservatives in that his public image is one of a viscerally angry right-wing warrior prepared to destroy the "Kenyan anti-colonialist" that Newt say occupies the White House. While his record speaks for itself on matters of rhetoric and unhinged policy, Newt is not a true conservative at all. He has consistently spoken out in favor of big government Republican ideals and has taken millions of dollars from special interests with a stake in the status quo.; http://www.sunstateactivist.org
To the sheep that ride the "isolationist" brand the liberal media have given to Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKfuS6gfxPY&feature=player_embedded
RageAgainstThem
that clip is pure propaganda lies and you ought to be ashamed of yourself for spreading lies what a bunch of crap.
Hi Ted,
I thought that clip made perfect sence, and asked a very serious question. Of all the issues Americans face, the one that concerns me the most is the U.S. Military occupying somewhere near 186 countries across the globe, the latest being AUSTRAILIA. As Ron Paul has stated, I would be more accepting of some of the Liberal agenda if Military spending was axed, and not just printing money out of thin air. Is that spreading lies?
@RageAgainstThem
That's exactly what I've been talking about, this Ron Paul character wants to end all the wars and spend the money in America.
He's a complete flake.
Romney and Newt promised more wars spending your tax dollars, vote for them!
@Jungle
I love your sarcasm. Yes more wars, more death, more corruption and greed... burn it all!
Vote for Romney or Newt.
Annnnnnnd back to reality... Ron Paul 2012.
RageAgainstThem
i aplogize i didn't listen to the whole clip because it pissed me off.I agree with what u just said about the military bases around the world and printing money out of thin air.I agree with Paul on what should be done about them.again i apologize for my comment.
I'm pretty sure I want to be friends with Ted and Rage. It is nice to see two people sharing views and not being completely rude to one another. Good job.
Ted... you know better than that.
People who spread that kind of garbage never show any remorse or shame. They do it because they suffer inside... and want everyone else to suffer with them.
Misery loves company.
But, good that you could see through the "Rage!"
Gingrich will implode like the others.
Romney cannot make accusations of hypocrisy convincingly because he is a hypocrite himself. We will see Romney's inconsistencies brought to the fore in due time.
Romney is John Kerry in 2004
Huntsman is John Edwards (but perhaps more ethical?)
Ron Paul is Howard Dean (likeable, but crazy)
Obama is likely W. (50/50 disliked, bad economy, still better than opposition)
I see history repeating itself, just in the opposite direction from 2004
if ron paul is crazy, then newt is a child molester
This is so much fun! Now if we could just get Trump to talk some more sh*t about him and Mr. Huntsman, it'll be clear sailin.
Ron Paul 2012!
Clear sailing? I don't think Paul has the popular appeal to take the Presidency. Perhaps there's a chance for him in the primary as Gingrich is a joke and Romney's collapsing under the weight of his own hypocrisy and Perry is W. 2.5
But I sure don't have a crystal ball. At least Paul as President would really give a good rattling to the crooks in the financial sector that hasn't been seen since Teddy Roosevelt. I just greatly dislike Paul's blind faith in the "free market" when it comes to self-regulation, monopolization, collusion and patently unethical behavior. Cheating becomes an industry standard if no one has to play by the rules.
Seriously, you may be right seeing how there is so much honesty and accountability out there now with all the laws and political hijinks going on over the years. Really!
Ron Paul is the only one who can best Obama since he will attract indys and truly anti-war dems...no one else can do that.
Paul and Huntsman are the only two in the race that may appeal to independents. Everyone else is too extreme, divisive, and hypocritical. Good thing for Obama they wont be the nominees.
I agree, Bill, and am really looking forward to the Gingrich-Huntsman debate next Monday night. I'm shocked Gingrich accepted that invitation, frankly.
I am not a Republican, but I am kinda sad that Jon Huntsman is not getting more support. I do think that he is someone worth taking a look at.
While I think Paul is on the right wing fringe on many issues, I respect his clarity and his honesty. This is a brutal ad and it obviously flows from the truth. Gingrich is the ultimate insider. And Gingrich is personally very greedy. He has that ugly quality of being willing to cross any line if it will net him personally another million bucks. His book deals show that, his Freddy and Fannie deal is likewise, and now it appears his healthcare lobbying was obscenely lucrative (and resulted, unsurprisingly, in him altering his position to take the $$.) Maybe he should lecture poor children on how to steal millions with just a few lies. Unfortunately, it takes alot of influence to be in a position for such larceny. Most history teachers just don't have the cache he does.
No, Newt wasn't a lobbyist for Fannie and Freddie, he was A HISTORIAN! Newt even said so himself.
24-7 spyz
Ron Paul 2012!
The GOP = Obama's best re-election campaign workers.
Newt is just the man I want as President if I had 300 million dollars and was starting a new company and wanted legislation to make my business prosper as I believe he can be bought. He is the poster child for Government Corruption. I am a Republican but could never vote for him. I will vote for Obama first.
Thanks Dave , for both your honesty, and common sense
Dave,
Yeah, right, and I am a Democrat that could never vote for Obama. Now that we both lied, don't you feel better?
@Dave: vote for Ron Paul and make a difference.
Dave, no real republican, or intelligent person, would ever vote for a person who looks to destroy this country. Do a little research on Gingrich and get the real story. Not sure he is the one, but much better than Big Ears.....
Go Ron Paul!! FTW: For The Win!
Gingrich, the biggest flip-flopping hypocrite on Planet Earth. If that is the best the Republicans can come up with, they are finished as a Party.
Dr. Paul is the only GOP candidate - actually, only candidate, period - that is honest, and has a plan to get America out of this current mess. Look at the Federal Reserve bailing out banks for trillions of dollars and not even telling the American public. This would not occur under President Paul. America's spending ways need to be ended. We need to stop playing the role of world police. Please vote for Ron Paul and sanity in 2012.
Ron Paul and sanity in the same sentence? That's a laugh.
All you people that are hesitant about Ron Paul should give him the benifit of the doubt and go to his web site RonPaul.com and read the issues thats he stands for.when i did that i found that he really has a plan that i think will work for this country
I always enjoy when detractors call Ron Paul "crazy" yet cannot come up within even one reason why.
AC - Likely because he's not up on the Jersey Shore.
Actually it's because his solutions are real and with that comes a lot of work. Instead of empty promises and can kicking.
Anthony Cali
I'm sure you have read Ron Paul's proposed plan (Restore America) where he plans to cut $1,000,000,000,000 in one year's time. He plans to eliminate five cabinet departments, HUD, Commerce, Interior, Education and Energy. Of the departments he would keep he plans to eliminate 10% of those federal workforce. Let's just put aside the work they do to promote community development, ensure fair housing practices, negotiate international trade, prevent unfair competition, safeguard our natural resources, help provide money to educate our children and promote energy conservation and safeguard our nuclear arsenal. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of jobs gone. Vanished, disappeared. Don't you think that would create a shock to our economy?
At the same time, he calls for the perpetual extension of the Bush Tax cuts for everyone, the reduction of capital gains taxes. He would give the young the option to gamble their money in the stock market as he dismantles Social Security. He would leave the states to deal with Medicare.
To pick up the slack he would suggest that some Randian heroes in the private sector would take over government duties. Total privatization is not the answer.
I will not call him crazy but his economic solutions are unrealistic and unworkable.
Our economy needs a shock and so does our over inflated government besides he wants to give those departments back to the states not close them altogether.Maybe i am wrong i admit that but i know that we can't go on like we are now.
Newt is just the man I want as president if I had 300 million dollars and was looking for someone to push legislation to make my business prosper. He is the poster child for corrupt government. I am a Republican but would rather vote for Obama. P.S. I think he looks like one of those Garbage Pail Kids they used to have on those cards.
I don't care how the president dresses. Don't care about his charisma. I do care how well he will do the job. Perhaps this is why America is in so much trouble.
Newt CANNOT do a good job. His policies are ridiculous. The guy is also extremely corrupt and will fight for whichever big business pays him most.
And I, for one, don't care about his debating skills...how many "debates" does a president engage in after the election?
Come to think of it, why not elect someone who is totally unattractive to eliminate the possibility of womanizing scandals?
This comes as no surprise. Ron Paul has high ethical standards. I personally don't agree with his platform, but he's absolutely honest. It comes as no surprise that someone like Paul would find Gingrich's hypocrisy offensive.
From Paul's perspective, the ad was probably more of a public service announcement than a campaign tactic.
Well, that would be the outcome... a public service announcement.
If RP would simply admit he has no chance but is in this simply to keep others honest I would have a little more empathy for his whackadoodleness!
Oh now wait a minute now... I thought Ron Paul was "above" mudslinging and name calling and petty politics? Now he's playing the same dirty tactics that he claims to despise and that his worshipers credit him for not doing?
Another flip-flop and lie from crazy old uncle Ron.
No, he was merely issuing a public service announcement.
Somebody needed to thoroughly call Gingrich out for being the money-driven hypocrite he is. Agreed, this is just a PSA for any Americans who are able to think independently of Sean Hannity
This isn't mudslinging and petty politics. Examples of those would be saying that Obama is from Kenya or that President Bush had a prior DUI conviction. This is policy based criticism.
They are all like the three stooges. Fingers to the eyes, punch in the stomach, pulling the hair, slaps to the head, yelling at one another, etc., etc.,etc.!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These people embarrass me!!!
"Public service announcement"? "Policy based criticism"? Please. If someone singled out Ron Paul in an ad like this, and pointed out all of his quirks -- like being against pork and government spending but then requested millions of dollars for shrimp farms in his home district, or how he supports the state's ability to take away civil rights or abortion rights while maintaining he is the only candidate who believes in rights and freedom -- all the Paul supporters would cry foul and call it an "attack ad" and "media bias."
Cameron..what's your point? Ron Paul, like others, is trying to become President and ads like these come and go in all directions.
If anyone called Ron Paul out on Pork spending, he'd explain it to you in terms you could understand. Ron Paul ABHORS Pork and ALWAYS votes against it. Are you aware that any money that has ALREADY BEEN BUDGETD, does not go into the coffers if it's not used? That money goes to the Executive Branch and there is NO ACCOUNTING for it from there. So, by voting against it, he's voting his conscience, and by putting a bid in for his constituents, he's protecting THEIR interests. It's the only way to vote, taking a stand on issue at large, while protecting the investments of his constituents. They've also paid those taxes and if it's going to be doled out, they DO deserve their portion.
Cameron: you said it...If RP was only just a wee bit more SANE and in touch w/basic rights, we'd have a solid candidate. With that said, with the massive intelligencia (sp?) out there, why are we stuck with candidates who don't know much about actual politics, geography, and socioeconomics? The system is BROKEN.
Not one entry,so far, in the Clown Show called the Republican Candidates, that can win. Not one.
So, if you really can't stand a black man as President; or, you are some nut case birther (Trump), or, you just hate any kind of moderate attempt to GET SOMETHING DONE.....too bad for you. This is a group of LOSERS, guys.... what happened to the REAL Republicans? The Dirksons; Nixons; Fords; ... hell, even Reagan, notwithstanding a few Facist tendencies, a nice enuf guy. What has happened to the Republican Party? Taken over by nuts and those who would be nuts.... NUTS!
OK, I'll bite.
Paul tacked on the shrimp farming funding and voted against the bill. He didn't support the bill but, if the money of his constituents will be put into pet projects, the least he could do is hedge his losses by making sure that if it passed some money would go back to them.
Paul is also a fan of the constitution. He knows his history and the debates our founding fathers went through. Do you? Let me refresh your memory. Following the reign of a strong central government that was out of touch with the citizenry, they wanted to establish a government that was less centralized; they gave the federal government limited authority and left the rest to the states. Yes, that is right; our country was founded with the guiding principle of limiting the role of the federal government and leaving the states to decide on their own policies. It is through politics and corruption, not government, that the behemoth we all know and loathe has come to be. Ron Paul wants to get rid of unnecessary meddling by the federal government in the affairs of states--if South Dakota says abortions are legal and North Dakota says they aren't, it is their business; California and Oregon can make their own determinations as to which is right, they don't need to force their views on either North or South Dakota (Sorry for picking on you guys, I just picked 4 states at random with no attention paid to actual views on the issue).
In the last two hundred years, people have forgotten that the federal government is the government of the state governments, not the government of the people. The people need to look to their state and local governments for answers while knowing that the federal government is just over the horizon, looking out to make sure the states don't get out of line.