The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Political Hay
Print Email
Text Size

Political Hay

All In

By on 7.13.11 @ 6:10AM

Ron Paul sacrifices his safe House seat for his presidential campaign.

Come January 2013, Dr. No will stop making House calls. Ron Paul made a surprise announcement yesterday that he would not run for reelection to his congressional seat this fall, focusing instead on his second Republican presidential campaign.

“I felt it was better that I concentrate on one election,” Paul told a local newspaper. “It’s about that time when I should change tactics.” In 1996, the same year Paul returned to Congress, Bob Dole was down in the polls and out of campaign cash. So the 35-year Capitol Hill veteran announced his resignation from the Senate.

“I will seek the presidency with nothing to fall back on but the judgment of the people of the United States and nowhere to go but the White House or home,” Dole said. Paul is given much less chance of reaching the White House than Dole. But unlike the former Senate majority leader, he isn’t out of money.

Why give up a safe House seat — and, at long last, a subcommittee chairmanship — to focus on a longshot presidential bid? To ask that question is to fundamentally misunderstand what makes Ron Paul different from other politicians.

Paul sees himself in large part as an educator, someone seeking to advance his particular brand of constitutional conservatism and right-wing libertarianism. For him, the House floor was a platform for talking about the Constitution, the gold standard, and Austrian economics. It was a place where he could rail against the Federal Reserve, speak out against foreign wars and fit currency, and quote Mises and Rothbard.

Now Paul has acquired a much larger platform. He gets to stand on the stage and debate presidential candidates pundits believe will be the next Republican nominee. In 2007, when he was stuck at 1 percent in the polls, he got to mix it up with Rudy Giuliani and John McCain. Paul is a much bigger presence than ever before. And wherever he goes, he now draws big, young crowds.

That doesn’t mean that winning votes isn’t important. Paul was elected to Congress three times as a non-incumbent. Brian Doherty, author of Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of American Libertarianism, notes that this might be an unprecedented achievement. In the course of his twelve terms, he frequently trounced Democratic — and hawkish Republican — opponents.

Paul campaign insiders believe they have an opportunity to make a statement in the 2012 presidential race. The issues environment, with its focus on debt and government growth rather than war and peace, is more favorable. The field is weaker. Paul’s son Rand recently demonstrated that Paulite arguments can be framed in a way that appeals to a broader range of Republicans.

Currently, Paul appears to be a (distant) second in fundraising behind presumptive frontrunner Mitt Romney. Polls show him as high as third place in both New Hampshire and Iowa, with national surveys frequently finding him ahead of Tim Pawlenty and Jon Hunstman, two of the media’s favorite serious candidates. He’s not exactly keeping Romney or fellow Texan Rick Perry awake at night. But Paul has more support than four years ago.

But there is nothing inevitable about a much improved performance once the voting starts. Before Michele Bachmann got into the race, Paul was increasingly inching into the double digits in national polls. Since she began gaining traction, Paul has slipped back below 10 percent. Bachmann also knocked Paul out of second place in New Hampshire.

To take it to the next level, Paul supporters believe they need to fix four mistakes from the previous campaign. Last time around, had impressive Internet “money bombs” but he raised the money too late to make much difference in the early states. So this time, they are front-loading their fundraising.

In 2008, Paul’s campaign was amateurish and disorganized. Phone calls from reporters went unanswered. Schedules were published late if at all. There was no discernible strategy. Three years later, things are more polished. The campaign sends out regular press releases and even opposition research on the other candidates. There seems to be more planning.

There has definitely been a concerted effort to channel the grassroots supporters’ energy into something more productive than alienating the supporters of other Republican presidential candidates. It’s still a work in progress — there was noticeable bad blood between the Paul backers and everyone else at both CPAC and the Republican Leadership Conference — but it is a major problem from 2008 they are trying to correct.

Finally, the Paul camp realizes that there needs to be more attention to the nuts and bolts of campaigning. This is especially true in the early states, where contenders not named Romney are going to have to do well to sustain any kind of momentum. It is hard to stay dedicated to the campaign trail if you are constantly running back to Washington to cast votes, except for sojourns to college campuses to talk about the Fed.

By abandoning his House seat, Paul hopes to put all his money, attention, and personnel into the presidential race. That frees up time, resources, and staff for campaigning. Even if they fall short, they figure they can gain a wider audience for Paul’s message and mint new Ron Paul Republicans. Maybe they can even help elect like-minded candidates to join Rand Paul and Justin Amash in Congress.

When it comes to spreading the message, the Doctor is always in.

About the Author

W. James Antle, III, author of the new book Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?, is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a senior editor of The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jimantle.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (136) |

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:22AM

"Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex), a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, won a poll of 882 “highly active” Republican voters in Texas. Paul won the poll with 22 percent of the Republican vote. Texas Governor Rick Perry grabbed second with 17 percent of the Republican vote, while pizza magnate Herman Cain took third with 14 percent of the vote.
The poll was conducted by the Azimuth Research Group and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 points. Participants were polled between May 29th and June 3rd, 2011."

Dustoff| 7.13.11 @ 10:21AM

Remember last time. He hasn't got a chance.

Noolasi Luapnor | 7.13.11 @ 11:29PM

Ron Paul blames America for violence in the Middle East. What else do you need to know about him?

Clint| 7.14.11 @ 2:44AM

Do Your Homework, Before You Run Your Uninformed Big Mouth.
We Know That The CIA's bin Laden Chief Agrees & Backs Up Dr. Ron Paul.

" Michael Scheuer, who was the head analyst at the CIA’s bin Laden unit, Alec Station, and authored the books Through Our Enemies Eyes and Imperial Hubris, said “I thought Mr. Paul captured it the other night exactly correctly. This war is dangerous to America because it’s based, not on gender equality, as Mr. Giuliani suggested, or any other kind of freedom, but simply because of what we do in the Islamic World – because ‘we’re over there,’ basically, as Mr. Paul said in the debate.”

Scheuer also agreed with Dr. Paul’s statement in the debate that the war in Iraq was a diversion from capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and that bin Laden was “delighted” that the U.S. is occupying Iraq as it has become a training ground and recruiting tool for new jihadists joining the movement."

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 4:13PM

Indeed, Clint is fantasizing. Paul is too old anyway, he wouldn't be able to take it, his son would be a better choice.
But the question is: how many massively egotistical candidates will the GOP have on offer by next summer? three dozen? four?

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 7:15PM

ObamaBoy Israel Firster Brooks Uses The Same Bullshit ,They Tried On Reagan.

Go Feed The Squirrels In The Park Brooks.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 7:51PM

Reagan has been out of office for decades; DEAD for 7 years; it is turning into political necrophilia.

You can't hide in Reagan's coffin your whole life.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:37PM

You're A Self-Fulfillin' Imbecile ObamaBoy Israel Firster Brooks

Next You'll Tell Us We Can't Talk About Washington, Lincoln,And Jefferson Because They've Been Dead For Years.

Now, Go Feed The Squirrels In The Park.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 10:53PM

But you don't talk about Washington, Lincoln, or Jefferson-- you DO talk about Reagan.
The Gipper is your secular God.

Too bad we can't clone Reagan, eh?

Clint| 7.14.11 @ 2:37AM

Once More, You're Full Of Crap ObamaBoy Israel Firster Brooks.

I've Quotes All Three, Numerous Times.

Now, Go Feed The Squirrels In The Park Brooks.

Mike Hawk| 7.13.11 @ 6:45AM

Outside his district, very few take this libertarian fringe candidate seriously. With a foreign policy akin to McGovern and other ideas more in tune with Barney Frank's, he isn't going anywhere.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:50AM

"Tea Partiers in two camps: Sarah Palin vs. Ron Paul:
Tea party activists are divided roughly into two camps, according to a POLITICO/TargetPoint poll: one that’s libertarian-minded and largely indifferent to hot-button values issues and another that’s culturally conservative and equally concerned about social and fiscal issues.
Palin, who topped the list with 15 percent, speaks for the 43 percent of those polled expressing the distinctly conservative view that government does too much, while also saying that it needs to promote traditional values.

Paul’s thinking is reflected by an almost identical 42 percent who said government does too much but should not try to promote any particular set of values — the hallmarks of libertarians. He came in second to Palin with 12 percent.

When asked to choose from a list of candidates for president in 2012, Palin and Paul also finished one-two — with Palin at 15 percent and Paul at 14 percent. "

JFGalt| 7.13.11 @ 8:26AM

Sarah Palin is a shill for RINO's infiltrating the Tea Party. She knows that the trend is her friend. Ron Paul on the other hand is closer to what the Tea Party is really about. The problem is that people are too stupid to vote for someone with principles and knowledge. You think CONgress fights OBAMA! now? A Republican or a Democratic CONgress would fight Ron Paul tooth and nail because he represents the will of the people to clean out that cesspool of corruption. But there is too much money at stake and people are too busy following the prettier looking candidate regardless of what they hold for the country. Ron Paul's ideas do sound crazy if you like the status quo. If so then you would have probably fit in well supporting the British during the American Revolution. Ron Paul is a bitter medicine that this country needs to start to heal itself and return to the ways that made this country work. For god's sake, we voted in a community organizer with a pedigree of communist influencers in his life who has done nothing but wreck the country even worse and we won't listen to a medical doctor who has also done extensive studies in economics and who knows the inner workings of congress and how this country's money really works. No that would make too much sense after all most people are too stupid or lazy to take the effort to really think outside of their intellectual comfort zones.

YeloStalyn| 7.13.11 @ 9:33AM

There are two things that hinder Paul among the masses. One... he's not very presidential (he's too energetic when he speaks which makes him SOUND like he's rambling, his suits are slightly too big, and unfortanately, those things matter to the masses).
Two... his supportors are very rude and insulting. For example... read teh above post. While it may be true, that the masses are willing to elect the Zero over someone with sound ideas... they don't take kindly to being told that they are stupid.

I like a lot of what Paul says... I'm currently undecided, but he's one of my tops. However, his supporters (the core, not the guy sitting at home and hears Paul and the light clicks on) are very annoying. The thought of going out to campaign with them is revolting. I'd rather stay at home on Saturday morning then spend time with them.

So... just a tip. Don't tell the person who's vote you want that they are stupid and ignorant. Instead, educate them and make them such no longer so that they, themselves, will discover the importance of voting for someone with a real heart for reform.

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 8:14PM

Excellent, excellent points. One can only hope that they resonate in certain quarters.
One catches many more flies with honey than with vinegar as the old saying goes.

RPFAE| 7.14.11 @ 3:03PM

In the interest of full disclosure: I am a fervent Ron Paul supporter. I am a political activist who holds two offices within the GOP. I am a 50 something, married, parent, grandparent, homeowner, taxpayer, voter, conservative business professional and consider myself to be more informed than the average citizen/activist/voter. I have heard the comments about "Ron Paul supporters" being rude, obnoxious, etc. I have interacted with and know, personally, many Paul fans and have never observed the type of behavior the complaints describe. There were well over ten thousand people at Paul's "Rally for the Republic" in 2008 and I did not witness any such behavior. In fact, when I asked one of the security guards about his opinion of Dr. Paul, he told me that prior to the rally he thought the "Paultards, Paulies, Paulbots, Paulites" would be conducting themselves like a pack of rabid dogs based upon what he had heard on TV and read on the internet ( I can only assume he deduced this from the same people who coined the aforementioned "nicknames"). After having spent the better part of two days with Congressman Paul's fan club he stated that he realized that he had been mistaken. He went on to tell me that they had not a single security incident and that the crowd was extremely well behaved, friendly, tidy and polite. That was a stark contrast to the police in riot gear outside the GOP convention a short distance away. The guard further stated, with a sheepish grin, that he "guessed that now he was a Paultard, too" and that he was very impressed with the entire event and had learned a lot. I believe those in attendance at Paul's rally were true supporters as they had to pay their own expenses to attend and it was not cheap.

This has caused me to ponder the similarity between this and the treatment, perceptions, and myths about the people who consider themselves to be part of the Tea Party. I wonder if there are some individuals who pretend to be Paul supporters (at events and on the internet) and conduct themselves in such a manner as to marginalize and cast aspersions on the congressman. The media (especially the MSM) does their own version of the same behavior over and over and over to the Tea Party and to Dr. Paul. Just a thought, perhaps worth considering by critical thinkers.

Zbigniew Mazurak | 7.13.11 @ 9:38AM

RP has nothing to do with the Tea Party and has never been a member of it. As for the claim that Palin is a RINO - that is the dumbest claim I've ever heard. SHe's been fighting Obama on every issue from the first day of his term, while promoting CONSERVATIVE principles and CONSERVATIVE policies.

Red Phillips | 7.13.11 @ 1:04PM

Zbig, your Wilsonian interventionism is NOT conservative. It is Jacobin. Perhaps you would like to engage my philosophical contention instead of just revealing your irrational Paul hate.

Occam's Tool| 7.13.11 @ 1:48PM

I love the fact that he is going all in as Don Quixote. I look forward to his electoral beatdown. In fact, here's my PROMISE: I will NEVER Post on TAS again should he win the Republican nomination.

I know my bete noir, C(lint) Elegans, does not have the fortitude to take the opposite end of this Promise, because in his bowels, he knows he's beat.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:20PM

Israel FirsterTool Job Got A Screwball Obsessive Fixation With Tea Party Clint, Our Tea Party Co-Favorite & Presidential Candidate Dr. Ron Paul, Our Tea Party Senator Dr. Rand Paul & The Many Tea Party Patriots Who Don't Asskiss Tool Job's Fanatic Israel Firster Agenda.

See A Real Psychiatrist, Nut Bag.

Bruno| 7.13.11 @ 7:48PM

Who is his Sancho Panza? I volunteer to be his Aldonza.

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 8:16PM

TMI! And troubling on any number of levels.

Mike Rogers| 7.13.11 @ 10:13AM

Sarah Palin is a mystery - on her recent campaign tour, for example, she visited NH, and chose to meet with the retired head of the state GOP (very much establishment) over the current head (very much a TEA party guy).
From a constitutional point of view, there's no-one like Ron Paul, but to win the war, we need someone who can sell the message to the people - thus 90% of the platform and better presence/charisma is likely to get us closer to where we need to be, compared to purity and insufficient charisma.
I actually support Herman Cain because he's the Reaganesque idea salesman in the field.

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 8:17PM

I'm with you. I would definitely be willing to volunteer to work on a Cain campaign. I would almost certainly contribute what money I could.

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 8:19PM

I still don't get the numbers. How does the Palin 15% equate to 43% of the voters? The same question for the Paul numbers. What am I missing?

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:44PM

They're Two Different Questions: Who Would You Vote For, For President & Who's Thinking Reflects Yours.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:45PM

"Ron Paul overwhelmingly won the 2011 RLC Presidential Straw Poll, gaining 612 (39.69%) of a total of 1542 votes! Jon Huntsman came in second with 382 votes (24.77%), Michele Bachmann was third with 191 votes (12.39%), while last year’s winner Mitt Romney slipped to fifth with only 74 votes (4.80%"

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 9:48PM

So, if I'm following, that means 43% feel that Palin's thinking reflects theirs, but only 15% would vote for her??

Clint| 7.14.11 @ 2:58AM

Yup, That's what Their Responses Were, Because They Had Other Candidates, like Romney. Pawlenty, Gingrich.....

irish19| 7.14.11 @ 11:00AM

Okay. A bit weird, but okay.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 6:47PM

Quite correct---Paul has no morals.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:54AM

"Rasmussen Poll:
Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%
Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race is – virtually dead even. "

RCV| 7.13.11 @ 11:22AM

... and the latest Rasmussen poll of GOP voters puts Paul at a whopping 7%, slightly ahead of Pawlenty and Santorum. The Paul bandwagon moves on!

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 7:19PM

Obama LawBoy & Israel Firster RCV Attempts To Join ObamaBoy & Israel Firster Brooks Badmouthin' Dr.Ron Paul.

We'll See You ObamaBoys At The 2012 General Election.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:47PM

The Dr.Ron Paul Bandwagon Does Move On Obama LawBoy Israel Firster RCV.

"Ron Paul overwhelmingly won the 2011 RLC Presidential Straw Poll, gaining 612 (39.69%) of a total of 1542 votes! Jon Huntsman came in second with 382 votes (24.77%), Michele Bachmann was third with 191 votes (12.39%), while last year’s winner Mitt Romney slipped to fifth with only 74 votes (4.80%"

Nonsense| 7.13.11 @ 7:28AM

Paul isn't "all in" unless he forgoes his congressional pension, too. At his age and length of service, it will provide a generous, soft landing.

Sean| 7.13.11 @ 1:10PM

Ron Paul already does forgo his congressional pension. Maybe do some research on him. He is one of two people in Congress who refuse that benefit.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 1:58PM

How can he fogo his pension if he hasn't recieved it yet. Wouldn't you have to be out of office to recieve a pension?

RPFAE| 7.14.11 @ 3:07PM

Congressman Paul does not participate in the very lucrative congressional pension plan. You don't have to believe me. Just "Google it".

Siegfried X| 7.13.11 @ 8:01AM

Libertarians lose every presidential election with less than 1% of the vote. A few Libertarians (the party) win local offices, but never national. So this is futile.

john dubose| 7.16.11 @ 8:56AM

In the general election, the deck is TOTALLY stacked in favor of the two major parties. Anyone who votes Libertarian or Green or anything else but Rep or Dem knows that their candidate will not only loose but not even get really covered by the news media. That will not change without electorial reform. To have any voice, libertarians have to join the Rep party and put up with a lot of social conservative guff.

Only an engaged public demanding electorial reform will change this situation.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:04AM

Ronald Reagan,
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path."

Matthew Quigley| 7.13.11 @ 8:06AM

Paul has a flake factor that's off the charts. He can be absolutely clear and coherent on economic and personal liberty issues, but on foreign policy, he's orbiting the Ferengi homeworld. Honestly, Conservatives should pay him due respect for his pro-Constitution stands domestically...but also recognize that when it comes to Israel and other elements of foreign policy (do a search and you'll see what I mean), Paul is NOT someone we should back.

KyMouse| 7.13.11 @ 9:09AM

"...he's orbiting the Ferengi homeworld." A good chuckle to start of my morning.

JimH| 7.13.11 @ 2:08PM

If you are pro market there is not a better place to be. Have you a copy of the Rules of Acquisition? Ferengis make Randians look like Communists.

irish19| 7.14.11 @ 12:18AM

LOL!

Red Phillips | 7.13.11 @ 1:12PM

Matthew, Paul's foreign policy non-interventionism FLOWS FROM his "pro-Constitution" stand, and is not antagonistic to it. It is modern intervetionist "conservatives" who embrace a contradiction, that the US government is incompetent and ineffective when it governs domestically, but is somehow magically super-competent when it comes to policing the world.

Occam's Tool| 7.13.11 @ 1:50PM

Matthew, my point exactly, although I believe he has Malign Intent.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 7:21PM

Apparently, The Stupid Party Is Headin' Right For The RINO-CINO Mittens Romney.

This Is Why The GOP Is Called The Stupid Party.

WJ| 7.14.11 @ 11:32AM

Paul has the audacity to place America's interests above those of Israel's. I suppose if you are an Israel Firster that makes him a traitor.

Perhaps he realizes, as does the American public, that we can no longer afford endless wars for Israel. The well has run dry.

Red Phillips | 7.14.11 @ 2:37PM

"I suppose ... that makes him a traitor."

And, don't forget, an anti-Semite. :-)

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 6:49PM

He is an antisemite. Nice grinning photo of him with Don Black.

I don't trust you with the future of my kids, Red and Clint. I think you guys could get them killed.

Michael L. Hauschild| 7.13.11 @ 8:08AM

III,
Torturing Clint like this is cruel and unusual punishment. Have you no compassion?

Siegfried X| 7.13.11 @ 8:23AM

Yup. A tiny dose of libertarianism is part of conservativism. Pure libertarianism is election-losing poison.

That's exactly how Reagan played it. Conservatives ran his administration, while libertarians were listened to as a tiny minority part of the coalition.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:28AM

"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."
-Ronald Reagan

KyMouse| 7.13.11 @ 9:11AM

How recently did Reagan say that? I'm more interested in what a candidate says and does closer to the present day.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:26PM

Because Ronald Reagan Is Quoted All The Time By Real Conservatives.

Apparently, You're Not A Real Conservative.

Siegfried X| 7.13.11 @ 10:32AM

Again, this is very true. Keep the libertarians onboard and fighting, but don't let them run the show.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:28PM

Libertarians Ain't About To Be "Used" By The GOP Ruling Elite RINO-CINO Fops.

They Are In The Tea Party That Is Purging Faux Conservatives Out Of The GOP.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:26AM

Interesting, how The Same Faux Conservatives attempt to Serial Smear Up & Marginalize Our Tea Party Co-Favorite Sarah Palin, Our Tea Party Presidential Candidate Michele Bachmann & Our Tea Party Co-Favorite & Presidential Candidate Dr.Ron Paul.
Like Paul, Reagan ran for President a couple of times before finally winning in 1980. In fact, when Ronald Reagan ran for the Republican nomination in 1976 he was opposed by the Republican leadership and was even considered a “kook” by many in the party. Sound familiar? At that time, only four Republican congressman supported Reagan and Ron Paul was one of them."

Ryan| 7.13.11 @ 8:29AM

Paul not running again for the house is a disservice to the country. I DO believe that he adds something to the national debate as a Presidential candidate, but he really can't win - his support base has a ceiling of 20% or so, not enough to overcome several other regular conservative candidates. I think that he is far better suited in a leadership role in the House, particularly on the subcommittee that he is chairing.

YeloStalyn| 7.13.11 @ 9:40AM

I think you're right. He should continue to run for Pres. If he ever wins, that will be good (for the most part). But that may not be his role when it's all said and done. Maybe his running for POTUS will have the largest effect by laying the groundwork for a real awakining of the American people... and maybe that leads to someone else with a sound libertarian/conservative mindset to take the Oval Office. But each time he fails to win the POTUS, he should remain in the House. God knows we need as many people who are defiant to government outreach as we can get in government.

Zbigniew Mazurak | 7.13.11 @ 9:40AM

Paul is not suitable for any office, not even dog catcher. He's a totally-discredited "Blame America First" Big L Libertarian. The sooner he leaves the House, the better. No more than 10% of Americans would ever vote for him.

Red Phillips | 7.13.11 @ 1:20PM

He's "totally" discredited? Isn't totally an absolute? So if that is so why do people here still defend him? Why are you still having to waste key strokes bashing him? Perhaps he is only "totally" discredited in your interventionist addled mind. Non-interventionism is on the rise on the right and no amout of foot-stomping on your part is going to change that. Your adament hyperbolic statements are your way of whistling past the grave yard. You wish Paul was totally discredited, but shouting it out over and over ain't gonna make it so.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 6:51PM

Red,

I wouldn't call Clint a person. He's a free living nematode with a typewriter.

And by the way, your views are also not particularly useful. You defend people who defend Nazis. That is all ye need to know. Big fan of Pat Buchana, too, right?

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 6:51PM

Sorry, Buchanan. Believe WWII was a wrong war, too, right?

canuckistani| 7.13.11 @ 9:47AM

He is a waste of time and space.

He has 38 bills before congress (I think 37 are rehashes of failed previous attempts). All will die. 29 of 38 have zero cosponsors, the 38th - the Libya thing. My favorites are the repeal of the 16th and the Marijuana bills.

Is it not obvious he can neither 1) act as a voice for the common man nor 2) get at least one other congressman to join him on his quixotic crusade into the absurd?

As president, is not building coalitions of the willing at least a small part of governing? Paul has no record to stand on other than his soapbox in 24 odd years dawdling in the halls of congress.

If you want to clear the gridlock, keep him and his minions from writing bills.

All I can say is: buh-bye, thank for the amusement.

Mike Rogers| 7.13.11 @ 10:25AM

The problem may be the messenger, who, after his loyal fans, is conspicuously short on broader support.
On the other hand, who is to say that repeal of the 16th (and 17th) is a bad idea? Is it really such a good thing for central government to pick our pockets directly in order to bribe our states into submission, and for the ruling class to own our senators so that the states have no voice?
Even the fuss over drug legalization can be put this way:
We conservatives and libertarians protest loudly when government tells us what light bulbs and foods to buy, but the conservatives cheer the government when it tells us which drugs are approved for social use and which are not.
For the record, I don't smoke, barely drink, and have never touched recreational drugs. However, I defend to the death your right to use them.
Let me pose this question: Alcohol is legal, but people still do stupid things like driving drunk or getting into fights - the stupid ones go to jail. Marijuana is illegal, and even people who don't do stupid stuff go to jail. This is better, how?

Siegfried X| 7.13.11 @ 10:45AM

"who is to say that repeal of the 16th (and 17th) is a bad idea?"

It's impossible, so worthless to talk about. That's the problem with pure libertarianism, that it is a fantasy world, like science fiction. Invent an alternate libertarian universe where gravity doesn't apply, etc.

Ryan| 7.13.11 @ 12:13PM

Wrong on the first sentence. The "worthless to talk about" ideas tend to lead to more pragmatic solutions to problems when fleshed out. THAT'S where I like Ron Paul - he says stuff that gets people thinking, stuff that is out of the box and that particularly the halls in DC need to hear.

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 9:53PM

So your thinking would be Rand rather than Ron.
Dangit, I almost got it completely alliterative. What's an 'r' word for 'than'?

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:00PM

Dear Mike,

If you watched the waste of your government money spent on police time and my time because of marijuana, you might think differently.

Here's some South African data. The percentage in my hospital in rural Minnesota is higher. Note that the Meds of choice were Cannabis and Meth.

Yet another area where OB/Gyn Paul is full of crap, says Psychiatrist Occam.

Display Settings:AbstractFormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListApply
Send to:Choose DestinationFileClipboardCollectionsE-mailOrderMy Bibliography
FormatSummary (text)Abstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListCSVCreate File
1 selected item: 19750250FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListMeSH and Other DataE-mailAdditional textE-mail"SPAM" filtering software notice
Add to Clipboard
Add to CollectionsOrder articles
Add to My Bibliography

Afr J Psychiatry (Johannesbg). 2009 Aug;12(3):213-7.
Occurrence of comorbid substance use disorders among acute psychiatric inpatients at Stikland Hospital in the Western Cape, South Africa.
Weich L, Pienaar W.
SourceStikland Hospital and Department of Psychiatry, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa. lizew@sun.ac.za

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the epidemiology of substance use disorders (SUD) among psychiatric inpatients in the Western Cape, South Africa. Therefore, this study was conducted to examine the prevalence of SUD among acute adult psychiatric inpatients at Stikland Hospital, one of three state acute psychiatric hospitals in the Western Cape.

METHOD: A prospective descriptive prevalence survey was undertaken over a three-month period. During this period, data was collected on psychiatric patients (N=298) who were hospitalized in the acute psychiatric wards at Stikland. This included patient demography, psychiatric and substance use history. Urine was also collected and analyzed for substances commonly abused in the Western Cape.

RESULTS: A co-morbid SUD (abuse or dependence) was diagnosed in 51% of patients. In addition, a diagnosis of a substance-induced psychiatric disorder was made in 8% of these patients, 1% of who was diagnosed with a substance-induced mood disorder, while 7% was diagnosed with a substance induced psychotic disorder. Patients diagnosed with a co-morbid SUD were younger than those without a SUD and more likely to have been involuntary admissions. These patients also displayed more violence prior to admission that contributed to their admission and were more likely to have used cannabis or methamphetamine as their preferred drug of abuse. Only a small group of patients had documented evidence of any prior interventions for their SUD.

CONCLUSION: SUD are prevalent among psychiatric inpatients and contribute to their morbidity. This has implications for staff training and service development.

PMID:19750250[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Free full text

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:31PM

As Usual, The Phoney Canuck tries For His Negative Attention Fix.

"Ron Paul overwhelmingly won the 2011 RLC Presidential Straw Poll, gaining 612 (39.69%) of a total of 1542 votes! Jon Huntsman came in second with 382 votes (24.77%), Michele Bachmann was third with 191 votes (12.39%), while last year’s winner Mitt Romney slipped to fifth with only 74 votes (4.80%)."

Interesting, Who's Posting Against Dr.Ron Paul.

canuckistani| 7.14.11 @ 11:22AM

Mitt is the only one on that list who has a faintest chance this year of bamboozling indepnedents to vote for him. That means 95.2% of the RLC is in a fantasy world. Might as well play civil war reenactments, better costumes and more certain outcomes.

Zbigniew Mazurak | 7.13.11 @ 9:44AM

"For him, the House floor was a platform for talking about the Constitution, the gold standard, and Austrian economics. It was a place where he could rail against the Federal Reserve, speak out against foreign wars and fit currency, and quote Mises and Rothbard."

Garbage. Antle evidently hasn't listened to what RP has been saying. RP seldom mentions currency issues, the Fed, Mises, Rothbard, or the Constitution. Everytime he speaks in front of a mike, he speaks out only against America's defense and against America's (admittedly messed up) foreign policy.

Fortunately, as I wrote yesterday, RP stands zero chance of winning the GOP nomination, let alone the White House, so he's a non-issue. He's an utterly discredited perennial candidate - the Libertarian counterpart of Lyndon LaRouche. He provides comic relief to Republicans, just like Lyndon LaRouche provides comic relief to the Democrats.

Dustoff| 7.13.11 @ 10:23AM

Two words.

Alex Jones.

Michael Bergsma| 7.14.11 @ 12:20PM

Exactly. Alex Jones has Ron Paul on his show frequently, and they discuss the "Global Conspiracy". I have had to deal personally with Ron Paul zealots and they are vicious and dishonest, all in the cause of liberty.

John M| 7.13.11 @ 12:02PM

So what's wrong with Congress declaring war and the President Fighting them to win as quickly as possible?

Red Phillips | 7.13.11 @ 1:58PM

Zbig, you are delusional. You hear what you want to hear. Ron Paul is constantly talking about monetary policy, the Fed, and the Constitution. What are you listening to? In fact, his tendency to focus on monetary issues has been frequently criticized. Your mind is so addled with Paul hate that it has impaired your ability to think rationally and see the world as it really is. Paul never talks about the Fed? That's a good one.

And, I'm still waiting to read why you think Wilsonian internationalist interventionism is conservative.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:02PM

Red and Clint,

enjoy your loss in Feb. I will laugh at you two, wrong on many things.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:33PM

You Still Posting From Tehran,Neo-Con Agenda Queen?

Why's Ya Change Your Information Address?

john dubose| 7.13.11 @ 10:23AM

Ron Paul is more prophet than politician. He points out the sins of our political class in sharp detail. He is right about just about everything. But he is not interested in making the deals that keep a diverse republic going. He does not have that presidential temperment and charisma.

In another place and time, he would be taken out by the powers that be. But now. .. Short sighted greed bunch that we are, we will simply not vote for him in any effective numbers.

9th ID| 7.13.11 @ 10:29AM

Actually, this is great news! Since Paul will never win the GOP primary, and he has promised to quit the House, it is a win-win situation for conservatives. Even as an independent, Paul could never draw away enough voters to do damage like Ross Perot did, IF a true conservative runs against Obama (unlike Romney, Huntsman, and Newt). The Tea Party is nicely positioned now between the radical extremes of Romney and Paul...

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:03PM

9th ID.

You are correct---you will note my squeals of Joy in a previous post. It means that his area can elect a Conservative Republican for a change instead of a pot endorsing asshole.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 10:42AM

Ron Paul will never win the independent vote. Even if he won all the conservative votes, without the independents he is done. I do look forward to him increasing discussions about the Constitution though.

Have you considered| 7.13.11 @ 10:56AM

I will support Ron Paul. I am a strict constructionist, and I have read the Constitution in companionship with the Federalist Papers, which I post here often.

If you people are going to be influenced by the Sean Hannity types, who sneer at Ron Paul, then I believe you are doing yourselves a disservice.

I challenge each of you to read the Federalist Papers, then read the Libertarian platform, and tell me exactly where they diverge.

At Article 1, Sec.8, there is a clear list of Enumerated Powers, and you need to read the Federalist to understand WHY these powers ONLY were ceded to the Federal head. Until you understand at the fundamental level HOW our republic is supposed to work, your arguments tend to be unsupported by the Constitution.

Our founders understood that power applied unevenly (non-uniformly) would create Factions which are anathema to the republican form of government. We now have factions of white vs. everyone else, religious vs non-religious, wealthy vs. poor, old vs. young, insured vs. non...you see my point.

Canuckastani above disparages Paul's bills that would repeal the 16th Amendment and legalize pot. This position does Not recognize the Constitution as intended. Firstly, there is NO Enumerated Power at Art 1, Sec 8, to allow the federal government to control substances. As a matter of fact, a review of the 18th and 21st amendments are the perfect study of adding a power to regulate a substance. The 18th Prohibited liquor, and Gave the Power to Enact the Law of Prohibition. The 21st Repealed this.

Also, our founders provided at Art 1, Sec 9 for a FLAT TAX based upon the Proportion of the population. Here are Alexander Hamilton's words on the subject, found at Federalist #36:

""Let it be recollected that the proportion of these taxes is not to be left to the discretion of the national legislature, but is to be determined by the numbers of each State, as described in the
second section of the first article. An actual census or enumeration of the people must furnish the rule, a circumstance which effectually shuts the door to partiality or oppression. The abuse of this power of taxation seems to have been provided against with guarded circumspection. ""

Read this part again "" a circumstance which effectually shuts the door to partiality or oppression."" and see that many of the factions that have been created, are in direct response to the 16th amendment, which by the way, does not contain the word "Direct".

Just think on it awhile.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 11:28AM

Once again. Ron Paul probably has the best understanding among our canidates of the Constitution. But will that get him elected? Even if he got the Republican votes, if he can not get the larger portion of Independents it is 4 more years of Obam. Electability should be just as important a factor as conservative credentials if we want to see victory in 2012

Have you considered| 7.13.11 @ 12:21PM

DS, I do understand your point, and it is not an invalid one.

Victory, even if hollow, is still victory, right?

Curious, are you enamored of our current Republican congressional leadership?

It seems to me that this is what a hollow victory looks like.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 12:29PM

No, not really enamored with our current congressional leadership. That said, they are better than what we had a year ago. We have to win the battle , then we have to keep reminding our leadership where we stand and that we will remove them in the fail to remember. That is something we have failed to do in the past. Once they were elected they thumbed their nose at us and we simply shrugged and said "At least they are our guys". I think that season is over. Getting the right person is a difficult task but it is more difficult if we forget that we can not put them in office alone. Independents make up roughly 30% of voters. That leaves roughly 70% divided between Democrat and Republicans. Doesn't take a math whiz to see without the lions share of independents your fight is over before it has even begun.

Have you considered| 7.13.11 @ 1:44PM

DS, I'm glad to know that you are not enamored of our current crop of Republicans. Again, this Is what a hollow victory looks like....100billion to 61billion, to 38billion to actually 300Million in cuts.

Additionally, as I said, your point is not invalid, and you are sadly probably correct.

As most folks will not bother to educate themselves as to the true Constitutionality of most issues, we are doomed to continuing to elect the lesser of two evils.

So unbelievably sad IMHO.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 1:56PM

All to true. All we can do is work to change the world around us. My stepsons are rapidly becoming conservatives at the tender age of 15 & 16. Much to their liberal father's chagrin.

Have you considered| 7.13.11 @ 2:48PM

DS, it is great that you are educating your stepsons, especially to the chagrin of a liberal :)

This micro-thread is what civil discourse is, thank you.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:37PM

You Just Capitulated To Mittens Romney

The GOP Stuck Us With The Serial Traitor To Conservatism John McCain & Now, The GOP Is Heading Right For Mittens Romney.

This Is Why The GOP Is Called The Stupid Party.

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 9:59PM

No, he didn't.

Clint| 7.14.11 @ 3:07AM

Tell it to Fox.

Poll: Romney Leads GOP Candidates

Updated: Wednesday, 08 Jun 2011, 5:33 PM CDT
Published : Wednesday, 08 Jun 2011, 5:33 PM CDT

(NewsCore) - Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is the preferred presidential nominee among a long list of potential Republican candidates, and he is also seen as qualified to be president by the largest number of voters, a FOX News poll released Wednesday shows.

Among Republican primary voters, 23 percent would like to see Romney as the nominee. He is followed by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani at 13 percent and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin at 12 percent. Of the three, only Romney has declared his candidacy.

Businessman Herman Cain and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich both receive the backing of seven percent of Republican primary voters. Texas Rep. Ron Paul and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty both come in at five percent."

Clint| 7.14.11 @ 3:48AM

"According to the latest Dick Morris poll, taken June 18th +19th, Congressman Ron Paul and Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann are now surging ahead nationwide, catching up to Mitt Romney and diminishing the chances of all other opponents including Gov. Rick Perry of Texas.

Romney 23%
Romney has money, is stalled and some polling has him declining. He’ll make his stand in New Hampshire his home turf.

Ron Paul 12%
Paul, the Tea Party favorite has a steady incline, raised 3 million in the last 15 days and is now leading in Northern New Hampshire.

Michelle Bachmann 12%
She’s not Sarah Palin! She’ll win in her home turf of Iowa, is raising lots of money but will struggle in New Hampshire."

irish19| 7.14.11 @ 11:08AM

Looking at both of those last two posts, the only conclusion to be drawn is that there is not yet any conclusion to be drawn. With a long list of candidates and possible candidates, it is way too early to start calling front runners and talking about inevitability.
Electability, as it is bandied about by establishment reps and the LSM, is important, but we must also remember it is what gave us McCain (that and open primaries). We cannot let the media decide who our candidate will be.
I suggest we all take a deep breath and start looking at the various candidates' stands on issues. Remember that no one is going to be all things to all people.
I suggest that the main issues are border security, the debt, and jobs in that order. That is what I will be looking at.
Thoughts?

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:06PM

Dear Irish---you are forgetting jihad. That may be number 4, but it will increase in intensity over the next 4 years, not decrease. The peak will come between 2030-2050.

irish19| 7.14.11 @ 7:17PM

Part of border security, OT. Keep the saracens out. For those who are here, either be Americans first or get the hell out.
finis

Al Adab| 7.13.11 @ 12:16PM

As well he should. these people who run for two offices concurrently are nothing more than professional shills who believe the office belongs to them, not to the voters who select them.

Truncheon| 7.13.11 @ 12:52PM

"Paul supporters believe they need to fix four mistakes from the previous campaign"

It's been my experience that "Paul supporters" are the most corrosive element of Ron Paul. Uniformly derisive, aggressive, and profane in any and every venue you encounter them.

It's time Ron Paul went home, which is the only conceivable outcome of this move. Perhaps he can get a gig on Fox or start a radio show.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 7:43PM

Let's See Ya Try To Make Dr.Ron Paul Go Home, While We're Makin' The RINO-CINO, Mittens Romney Go Home.
Bring It Big Mouth.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:09PM

"I" don't have to try. The people will speak and Paul's political career will be blotted out, as he, like you, (and Red) are Amalek.

Michael Bergsma| 7.14.11 @ 12:33PM

Absolutely. At Ron Paul rallies his supporters would start chanting "9-11 was an inside job" and he and his staff would do nothing to stop it. In 2008, Ron Paul did not win his own congressional district in the Presidential primary. The man who ran against him for Congress in the primary had to send his children to another location because of death threats. In my district, Ron Paul received less than 5% of the vote, but his supporters tried to poach delegates anyway. They were able to pull this off in a couple of districts. To their dismay, to be appointed a delegate you had to sign a pledge to the winner of the primary, McCain. At the convention, they were not asked again; the signed pledge was used for the voting and their ploy to vote for Ron Paul failed.

Dick Nome| 7.13.11 @ 1:22PM

Paul supporters are kooks and some of the rudest outside of the Democrats. A charisma challenged candidate such as this is usually relegated to the sidelines.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:49PM

This Is The Same Attempted Smear Tactics That RINO-CINO Phoney Conservatives Use Against Our Other Tea Party Candidates.

We'll See Your Big Mouth At The 2012 GOP Primary Polls.

RCV| 7.13.11 @ 7:05PM

Proving his point.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 7:40PM

The Obama Law Boy RCV. Bus Calls The Canary Yellow

We'll Match Dr.Ron Paul's Supporters Against Your Fellow ObamaBoys & Your Fellow Israel Firsters Obama LawBoy Israel Firster RCV

Interesting,Who always Opposes To Dr. Ron Paul & His Supporters.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:15PM

yes, C(lint) Elegans...people who oppose Ron Paul and his supporters usually don't accept donations and get pictures taken with Nazis. That's one type.

They also are capable of writing intelligent sentences on their own without clipping. That's another type.

They also don't use slurs like "SandMonkeys" to refer to Jews. That's a third type.

And they also don't make physical threats to others while hiding behind pseudonyms like a cheap dime store hood. That's a fourth type.

And they don't reproduce themselves by self-fertilization while being genetically limited to 302 Brain cells. That's a fifth type.

Your turn RCV. Clint is starting to exhaust me with his face to foot writing style.

William R| 7.14.11 @ 11:45PM

You're such a third rate punk Tool Job. Don Black walked into an open campaign rally and paid 25 dollars to have his picture taken with the congressman. Ron Paul had no idea who the man was. You're scum of the earth tooljob.

RCV| 7.15.11 @ 2:58PM

Clint/Tim*: The numbers and types of people who oppose Ron Paul are legion. They encompass virtually all people of good will, Democrats and Republicans alike. People who know and despise anti-semitism whenever it rears its ugly head. People who care about the security of this country and our children, as well as the security of good innocent people in other countries. People who want to see freedom preserved, not just for Americans, but for our allies abroad and for brave human beings struggling for freedom around the world. People who don't believe that 9-11 was an inside job, or that our leaders are conspiring to to form a North American Union with Canada and Mexico, or that Jewish banking interests have created the Fed to manipulate the lives of non-Jews.

On the other side are the Ron Pauls, and Dennis Kuciniches and Cynthia McKinneys and Clint/Tim*s of the world. The nutjobs.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:18PM

Clint, please tell me again why you're not antisemitic---I love a good fairytale.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:18PM

Dear Dick,

I would agree with you except that you are too kind.

Tax All Liberals| 7.13.11 @ 3:39PM

This only means that Ron Paul is retiring to the home on the range where the libertarian buffalo roam.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:45PM

Now, The Stupid Party Heads Right To Another RINO-CINO Candidate, Mittens Romney.

Tom| 7.13.11 @ 5:00PM

Ron Paul is one of the most unscrupalous hypocrites in modern American politics. The fact that he is able to enchant his small cadre of disciples with his nutball ideas speaks more to their ignorance than to his worthiness.

I attended most of the annual Marches for Life held each January 22 on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade since 1989. I don't EVER remember Paul showing up for any of them. Lo and behold, he makes a grand appearance in 2008 while running for the Republican primaries, and his Paultards did everything they could to turn it into a Ron Paul Campaign Rally.

The very next year, since there was no Republican nomination to gain, Paul again was a no-show.

Regarding Ron Paul; good riddance to bad rubbish.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 6:42PM

No Candidate Is More Pro-Life Than Dr. Ron Paul.

"Ron Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He believes that human life starts at conception, and that casual elimination of the unborn leads to a careless attitude towards all life.

Recalling his personal observation of a late-term abortion performed by one of his instructors during his medical residency, Ron Paul stated, “It was pretty dramatic for me to see a two-and-a-half-pound baby taken out crying and breathing and put in a bucket.”

“I am strongly pro-life. I think one of the most disastrous rulings of this century was Roe versus Wade. I do believe in the slippery slope theory. I believe that if people are careless and casual about life at the beginning of life, we will be careless and casual about life at the end. Abortion leads to euthanasia. I believe that.”

Tom| 7.13.11 @ 8:39PM

"No Candidate Is More Pro-Life Than Dr. Ron Paul."

That is total garbage. Ron Paul has done absolutely NOTHING to aid the pro-life movement in this country. He hasn't lifted a finger to bring down Roe v. Wade.

Now go back to your little Paultard Fantasyland.

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:52PM

Do Your Homework Before You Run Your Uninformed Yap.

Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)

Clint| 7.13.11 @ 8:54PM

Now Name Your Candidate & Their Votes Against Abortion.

You're Up Asshat

irish19| 7.13.11 @ 10:03PM

If you were accurate, the record is mixed.
You say he voted no on forbidding human cloning for research and twice voted against making it a crime to harm a fetus in the commission of another crime. You may want to rethink your stand here.

Clint| 7.14.11 @ 3:16AM

Dr.Ron Paul Is A Constitutional Conservative & says States need To Take Care Of That, At Their States Rights Level.
No candidate has cast more Votes Against Abortion than Dr.Ron Paul.

Occam's Tool| 7.14.11 @ 7:27PM

Clint, as usual, you are wrong. Robert Aderholt of Alabama has a perfect abortion voting record.

Mistral| 7.13.11 @ 5:13PM

Finally, a real giant with some genuine intelligence and a brain that functions fully is offering himself as a future POTUS. However, Americans, generally speaking, are so politically naive; intellectually inept and singularly lacking in discernment that they will almost completely overlook Ron Paul. When one thinks that several voters who went with Haji Hussein Obama believed his running mate was Sarah Palin and that he was running on an anti-abortion ticket, one has to contemplate gravely the actual level of political awareness in the USA. Ron has an uphill task with such abominable political illiteracy that it is to America's everlasting detriment he will be sorely missed in The White House. The future looks even bleaker than we imagine.

Decentralizer | 7.13.11 @ 7:30PM

Amen. Ron Paul is the most consistent candidate that I've ever followed and our best hope. The political class including Fox News and all the kingmakers do not want him in the mix. He'll be in the final 3 and with no baggage. Stuff happens.

jmulcahy| 7.14.11 @ 4:57AM

Well, Eeyore, I hope Congressman Paul doesn't put you in charge of his Get-Out-The Vote effort. Your disdain for the American people is disgusting.

POST American| 7.13.11 @ 10:20PM

---Surely Paul is the ONLY man even semi-standing
during this final stage of the Globalist RED China
TREASON op --during this final phase of the POST American republic.

weddingdress | 7.15.11 @ 4:53AM

Finally, a real giant with some genuine intelligence and a brain that functions fully is offering himself as a future POTUS. However, Americans, generally speaking, are so politically naive; intellectually inept and singularly lacking in discernment that they will almost completely overlook Ron Paul. When one thinks that several voters who went with Haji Hussein Obama believed his running mate was Sarah Palin and that he was running on an anti-abortion ticket, one has to contemplate gravely the actual level of political awareness in the USA. Ron has an uphill task with such abominable political illiteracy that it is to America's everlasting detriment he will be sorely missed in The White House. The future looks even bleaker than we imagine.

RCV| 7.15.11 @ 3:02PM

This post is an excellent example of why the Paul folks manage to alienate so many people across the political spectrum. They truly believe that American as a whole are just dumber than the truly superior beings known as Libertarians. They look down on Americans in general, like all small cadres of superior intellectuals in history, left and right.

Decentralizer | 7.15.11 @ 6:58PM

I think we can agree that you are a government parasite.

dual saw | 10.9.11 @ 2:23AM

THE LEAVES OF GRASS to perhaps presidential interns half one's age, but aint worth excrement otherwise!!!!!!!

Feed Mill | 10.19.11 @ 11:17PM

I'll admit that I don't much buy into the security through obscurity idea of "if the user doesn't need to crack it for reasons of choice

Aluminum Wallet | 11.15.11 @ 9:14PM

But for Scottish users of the iPhone 4S, for now, voice-controlled technologies may not be quite ready for them yet.

More Articles by W. James Antle, III

More Articles From Political Hay

Damage Control for Dummies

May 22, 2013 | Matt Purple

McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal

May 21, 2013 | Ross Kaminsky

It’s.The.Law

May 20, 2013 | Ross Kaminsky

Holder’s Holdout

May 16, 2013 | Kaylin Bugos

From Bimbos to Benghazi

May 9, 2013 | Jeffrey Lord

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/13/all-in

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

George Neumayr|111 comments

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple|66 comments

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara|55 comments

Restrain the Abusive Administative State

Doug Bandow|18 comments

Disabling American Sovereignty

Iain Murray|11 comments

The Other Gosnells

Jordan Gonzalez|12 comments

Can He Unite Virginia’s GOP?

Carten Cordell|26 comments

Undoing the Brainwashing

Thomas Sowell|19 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong

Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM

Muslims Murder British Soldier in London

Ross Kaminsky | 2:00PM

Anthony Weiner’s Campaign Video

Patrick Ryan | 1:33PM

Congressional Democrat Outraged Over IRS Scandal

Kaylin Bugos | 12:57PM

Immigration Bill Clears Key Committee

Jordan Gonzalez | 11:56AM

Nixonian

Yogi Love | 11:54AM

Moore, OK by Steve Breen

Patrick Ryan | 11:50AM

He’s Just Not That Into You

Ross Kaminsky | 11:34AM

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.