Comments

2
I used to live with a libertarian who was patently obsessed with Ron Paul. Bad times :(
4
Hell, I'd vote for him over Palin.
5
Oh hell yes he should.

Maximum entertainment per election dollar. Also, drawing away all the crazy libertarian vote from whichever of the currently front-running school of piranhas gets the Republican nomination.
6
My dream ticket is Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich... their combined crazy would combine like wondertwins and save the world.
7
Ron Paul as a Democratic nominee. Sarah Palin as Republican nominee. YAY ratings! Everybody loses. :-(
8
Paul would split the Republican party and Obama would win. Good news. Go for it.
9
Ron Paul will run for President in 2012 in order to finance his Congressional campaign in Texas.
10
Yes.

And so should Sarah P, with Bozo the Clown as her running mate.

That way we can kick the Republicants to the curb again.
11
Yes, and Lyndon LaRouche should be his running mate. Ralph Nader can be their secretary of Great Googly Moogly!
12
Even if the media gave Paul a golden, sparkle-unicorn-vomit-load of free air time, he still wouldn't stand a snowball's chance.

Which is not to say he shouldn't run of course. But it would be fun to watch all those Libertarian's jaws collectively drop come election day when their messiah not only "survives" the incessant secret Zionist/Government hit-squads, but still manages to come in dead last in the national polls.

I realize they'll just concoct some new half-baked conspiracy theory to explain it, but it would still be amusing nevertheless.
13
reddit.com is the biggest Ron Paul fansite there is. It's maddening. "We should abolish everything associated with the government -Ron Paul" - ten bazillion upvotes
14
He should decline to run and endorse Gary Johnson, a libertarian with executive experience and lacking the crackpot appeal.
15
I wouldn't vote for him and I can't imagine him winning (or even doing very well) but if he wants to run, sure.
16
I don't get the Ron-Paul-as-Messiah thing. These people have a serious case of cult-of-personality going on - and frankly, I don't even see any personality there. I don't get it. What are they drawn to? There's no there there.
17
Absolutely he should run.

He won't get any farther than he did last time, of course. He'll never crack 10% of the vote in any presidential primary. But he should run nevertheless, for the entertainment value alone.
18
I tend to agree with @4.
19
Ron Paul libertarians are the stupidest people on Earth. They advocate policies that would concentrate wealth in the smallest percentage of the population's hands, and out of their own. They are passionately against themselves and their own wellbeing. They have no understanding of government or democracy. Seriously. I've met a lot of stupid people. They are the dumbest. I'm amazed Libertarians can remember to breathe.

@6 Dennis Kucinich may be a crazy little elf-man, but he's been right about everything regarding Iraq, Afghanistan, election fraud, and the economy. Maybe the alien visitors gave him psychic powers.
20
@16 - It's only looks like a cult-of-personality because there is nobody else running on the platform that he does. His supporters firmly believe in his message that the Federal Government shouldn't be doing half the things that it currently does. It's easier to argue cult-of-personality for Obama or Palin followers since those kinds of politicians have nothing of substance to offer and just say what their team wants to hear.
21
I just want to take the time to thank Jews for preventing Ron Paul from becoming President.
22
Split the party. Split it hard.
23
I like the assertion that Ron Paul is somehow both entitled to, and being denied, the time of day on TV.

Doesn't he get the weather channel? Or some kind of TV Guide channel? Those almost always have a clock on them somewhere, at least some of the time.
24
@19: For the sake of conversation, could you please compare and contrast Kucinich's and Paul's positions on Iraq, Afghanistan, election fraud, and the economy?
25
"Zionist news"? Rupert Murdoch is a Zionist?
26
"When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You're talking Antisemitism." -Martin Luther King
27
It's important to our television entertainment that Ron Paul not only runs but wins in 2012.

TV's been boring; watching the end of the world would spice things up again.
28
....because this was one commenter on Paul's blog? I'm not a fan of the man either, but it's kind of dishonest to treat a single comment on a post like it's representative of the entire website. What if we did that with The Stranger?
29
Who doesn't want to see an Iowa debate with Palin and Paul trying to out hijack each other to drive the crazy train?

30
Palin/Malkin for '12! Get your tinfoil hats ready!
Didn't libertarians essentially run the country already, when Alan Greenspan based Fed economic policy on the works of Ayn Rand? And then have to apologize when lack of bank regulation helped create the current depression, uh, recession? Ron Paul could give us 4 more years of 2008.
But sure, he should run, perhaps with Bruno/Sacha Baron Cohen as his running mate.
31
"Which is not to say he shouldn't run of course. But it would be fun to watch all those Libertarian's jaws collectively drop come election day when their messiah not only "survives" the incessant secret Zionist/Government hit-squads, but still manages to come in dead last in the national polls."

Comte, you're being terribly unfair to both Ron Paul and Lyndon LaRouche. He may still be alive in 2012, and the last position is ALWAYS his.

Geni, He doesn't need a personality. He "saves babies", and that's enough for a lot of people. He knows this, and has allowed his visage to appear on lots of dreadful art, mostly of him in scrubs holding a fresh baby, looking (to me, at least) as if he were about to eat it. I think Mother Vel-DuRay is right when she says, "Everybody loves babies. But most people don't like children"

And everyone, what about Michelle Bachman? Doesn't she deserve a seat at the table? I think she would make an excellent Secretary of State.
32
26/by: "When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You're talking Antisemitism." -Martin Luther King

Dr. King was a great man but that doesn't mean he was right about everything. While plenty of people who are anti-Zionist are undoubtedly antisemitic, it doesn't automatically follow that being opposed to the policy of Zionism means you hate Jewish people.

34
Well, he ran before, I guess he can run again. Old news. I don't give a shit. Fuck him and his libertarian elitist bullshit, though. And his son Rand can go fuck himself as well. When the good bergers rise up against Ron and Rand when Ron and Rand fuck with social security, their arrogant libertarian assholes will be puckered so hard that if you shoved a lump of coal up Ron or Rand's asshole, you'd come out with a diamond.
35
while plenty of people who are anti-Zionist are undoubtedly antisemitic, it doesn't automatically follow that being opposed to the policy of Zionism means you hate Jewish people.


Agreed but...when you hear people talk about "the zionists" doing anything that isn't specifically Israel related, you can be reasonably certain that "zionist" is just a round-about way of saying "jew". I am very critical of much policy surrounding Israel, so in that sense you could say I'm critical of zionism. Zionists are concerned with Israel and should be discussed in that context. Grumbling about "the zionists" conspiring to murder politicians for their own nefarious reasons positively stinks of "Protocols of Zion" anti-semitic bullshit.
I don't believe Ron Paul is a racist, but there can be no doubt that he's quite popular on the Stormfront forums. Remember, he defends the rights of private businesses to be overtly openly racist. The counters of woolworth's in a Ron Paul America would remain segregated.
36
Oh I would love that. If you enjoyed watching Obama "do nothing" get ready for a whole new level of nothing!
37
Ron Paul gives real libertarians a bad name. We're not all idiots full of conspiracy theories with no understanding of economics. Don't judge libertarians in general by one crackpot.
38
@37: Libertarians give Libertarians a bad name. Seriously, I might agree with some Libertarian beliefs if not for the fact that every time I've heard an honest-to-god self-proclaimed Libertarian speaks up to "clarify" his stance on something, out comes the most poorly-reasoned dogma this side of Scientology.

How you people always seem to go from an admirable and broadly popular position like "Government should limit its intervention in the day-to-day lives of ordinary citizens" to the endpoint of "every aspect of our lives should be governed by corporations engaged in a never-ending death struggle over who gets to be most profitable" is beyond me.
39
Yes, he should run for President because he'll split the Republican vote. Man's a complete asshat, but there's something to be said for someone who separates the biggest idiots in any group into their own separate room.

Also, he believes that there's no such thing as a complication of pregnancy that necessitates abortion to save the mother's life, and he's an OB/GYN.
40
@38: This libertarian supports antitrust law because monopolies prevent free-market competition from working. However, if you want to understand libertarians, it may help to realize that right now in the US, every aspect of our lives is governed by the federal government in a never-ending partisan death struggle by politicians. And the federal government is by far bigger, scarier, and more powerful than the world's biggest corporations.
41
Paul shouldn't definitely run, better then Huckabee. Let's be honest- Obama has no shot of being reelected. It's refreshing too see

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.