The Swamp
Text size:  A A A A A

« House to take up Armenian resolution despite Bush | Main | Cracking down on the Daily Racing Form at Capitol »

Ron Paul draws more liberal praise

Email Print Link
Election 2008
[What is this?]
Posted October 10, 2007 2:11 PM
The Swamp

Rep. Ron Paul at the Republican presidential candidates' debate, Oct. 9, 2007. Credit: Geoff Robins - AFP/Getty Images.

by Frank James

The umbrella group Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, whose members include such progressive groups as the Service Employees Union International and Political Action, issued a laudatory shout out today to Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, the libertarian Republican presidential candidate:

While Crowded Field of Republicans Follow Bush Over Cliff on Iraq War, Ron Paul Stands Out as Being Right on Iraq

GOP Presidential Hopeful Decries Fellow Candidates’ Support of Endless War

Washington, DC – While the rest of the Republicans continue to follow President Bush’s unpopular Iraq war policy, Representative Ron Paul is the lone anti-war Republican presidential candidate in the crowded GOP primary field. During yesterday’s debate he took his fellow Republicans to task for their support of President Bush’s policy of endless war in Iraq. While most of the candidates continued to saber rattle about Iran, the congressman refused to allow them to gloss over the most important issue facing Americans today.

Thus continue the striking paens to Paul coming from, of all places, liberals who would find themselves differing on a host of other, mainly but but not exclusively, domestic issues.

Paul, for instance, opposes many of the policies that are a given to many progressives. Obviously, there's a bit of the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my friend going on here.

Here's a useful, though admittedly lengthy excerpt from the Almanac of American Politics, 2004 edition that helps somewhat explain Paul:

... In his first stint in the House, Paul advanced some ideas that in the mid-1990s had almost become mainstream--term limits and abolition of the income tax. Other Paul ideas remain outside the political pale: endorsing a group that wants to end all government funding of education, cutting $150 billion from the defense budget and returning to the gold standard. Paul practices what he preaches. He will not accept payment by Medicare or Medicaid, he wouldn't let his children accept federal student loans and he refuses his congressional pension.

Paul reentered electoral politics after Congressman Greg Laughlin switched parties and became a Republican in June 1995. Laughlin had a moderate voting record, by no means the most conservative of Texas Democrats. Republicans offered him a seat on Ways and Means if he switched, and he did. Paul decided to run again in 1996, raising money from his nationwide network of Libertarians, gold bugs and subscribers to the Ron Paul Political Report. Laughlin led in the primary with 43% of the vote, but Paul won the runoff 54%-46%. Democrats ran Charles "Lefty" Morris, a former president of the state trial lawyers' association. Morris ("Lefty is right") hit Paul for favoring abolition of the minimum wage, repealing federal anti-drug laws and anti-prostitution laws. Paul ran 1% ahead of Bob Dole and won 51%-48%.

With his libertarian views, Paul's voting record is anything but rock solid Republican; National Journal ratings place him near the middle of the House. Frequently, his insistence on limited government made Paul the House's lonely dissenter--against bills to require states to report on their progress in improving student achievement, to award Congressional Gold Medals to Rosa Parks and Pope John Paul II, to pass the Patriot Act after September 11. He favors relaxation of restrictions on illegal drugs, and he filed a lawsuit challenging the McCain-Feingold campaign finance act as a violation of the First Amendment. Unsurprisingly, he voted against the Medicare/prescription drug bill in 2003.

His isolationist views on foreign policy have made his voting record on those issues indistinct from many liberal Democrats. He was the only Republican to vote "present" on the resolution expressing support for the military forces at the start of the war with Iraq. He supports virtually no role for the U.S. government overseas--from military defense to international trade; he calls himself a "non-interventionist," not an isolationist. In a July 2003 speech in the House, which he called "Neo-Conned!", he harshly attacked the Bush administration and its supporters.

"The so-called conservative revolution of the past two decades has given us massive growth in government size, spending and regulation." His iconoclasm has reached the point that he is probably the least dependable and persuadable Republican in the House--even though his district is next door to Tom DeLay's. Interestingly, many liberals have begun to praise him. And he does offer alternatives. In 2003 and 2004 he was among the most prolific legislators, sponsoring 68 bills and eight amendments. None passed.

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo


If the Freepers had any common sense (they don't) they'd nominate Ron Paul.

I hope the Freeper Party nominates the phony that is Rudy Julieannie, she's George W. Bush part 2.

Rudy has gotten so much play out of doing some interviews and photo-ops after 9/11 but in the general election he would get destroyed for what he REALLY did before, during and after 9/11..

One thing this story omits about Paul's reelection to the House in 1997 is that then Gov. Bush endorsed his Democratic opponent over him. Tells you how much of a real, small-government Republican our president really is...

Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist!!!!

I can't even imagine how much better off our country would be, if Dr. Paul is elected president. Let's hope there's enough sanity left among us.

As a registered Democrat I could see myself voting for Ron Paul in the future. (This shows you don't have to be totally "loony liberal" or "republican nutjob".)

There are folks out there with common sense.

While Ron Paul is a good man at heart, he is completely wrong on this issue.

This is why I support RON PAUL. There are three things about present day America that I find FRIGHTENING (I'm not sure which is most frightening):

1. Our failed, imperialistic, foreign policy: The Iraq war is only the most visible part of the problem. We have troops in I-don't-know-how-many countries world wide. Bush and his cronies talk about promoting "democracy," but before Saddam decided to grab Kuwait the US strongly supported Saddam. We have also regularly supported a long list of repressive regimes: the Shah of Iran, the current Saudi government, who knows how many African and South American war lords, etc. Lets face it. Most of the world hates us. Terrorism is simply a by-product of our own foreign policy. Every time an Iraqi child is killed with the US occupying the country - regardless of whether we had anything to do with the death - more hatred is generated and more Islamics volunteer or give money to the terrorists. I cannot support a presidential candidate who does not offer a fundamental change of our foreign policy. RON PAUL will bring all the troops home, stop policing the world, and stop meddling in other country’s affairs.

2. National debt: the official debt is approaching $9 trillion dollars, but if you add in the amounts that the government is supposedly committed to pay out in entitlement programs, such as social security and medicare, the debt is over $50 trillion. The situation is absolutely unsustainable. If spending is not controlled, we are facing either massive default by the government or Weimar Republic style inflation. I am frightened that the result will be a depression that makes the 1930s look prosperous. Most of the Republican candidates talk about controlling spending and balancing the budget but, in practice, they spend, spend, spend. The Democratic candidates hardly mention the problem and propose massive new spending. I cannot support a presidential candidate who will not downsize the federal government and drastically cut spending. RON PAUL is the only candidate has proposed eliminating entire government departments. He is serious about smaller government.

2. The Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc.: Using 9/11 and the terrorists that our own foreign policy has generated as an excuse, the Bush administration has essentially repealed the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments and the habeas corpus clause of the Constitution. The government admits that it is engaged in internet spying, wiretaps, and in some cases, physical searches without probable cause or a warrant. People are being held in cognito, without trial or even indictment. They are denied legal counsel and are not permitted to bring a writ of habeas corpus. The general public seems to believe that only persons of Arabic decent are affected, but the possibility of this being extended to political dissenters is frightening. The German public of the early 1930s thought only Jews were affected. I cannot support a presidential candidate who will not restore the Bill of Rights. RON PAUL was one of the few Republicans to vote against the Patriot Act. He is pledged to uphold the Constitution, not destroy it.

Allow me to clarify dave. Ron Paul is not an isolationist. Besides non-interventionism (minding your own business), isolationism also means cutting off all foreign relations, and stopping most/all foreign trade (think korea).

Contrast this with Ron, who wants strong, PEACABLE relations with foreign countries, and a strong import/export economy. A free country should not spend 50 years in a state of constant war, and expect prosperity.

DR PAUL should drop out.He is wasting everybody's time . He has no chance of becoming president.One of the good things about the process is that guys like this will never be elected.

As liberals see the undermining of the Bill -O- Rights by big-government conservatives, with the help of big-government liberals, some of them are realizing the threat of the growth of government power and are doing some reassessing. Some of my liberal friends are, anyway.

Also, many of Ron Paul's political viewpoints are more mainstream than those in the "punditocracy" think.

So, concerned citizen, as a registered Democrat, you could see yourself voting for someone who has advocated to abolish the federal income tax (not just cut taxes, mind you), someone who would seek to close the Department of Education and someone who opposes Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (not just someone who would seek to cut their funding or privatize the programs?) Very curious, since my understanding has been that such positions stand completely opposed to the positions of the Democratic party. Iraq and the War on Terror would be the only positions on which Ron Paul and many Democrats would agree.

I could vote for Ron Paul. I'm not a big fan of his domestic policies, but I think he is far more honest than most of the candidates on both sides.

Ron Paul compares to the mental midget Giuliani as Superman compares to Peewee Herman. Paul is a giant Constitutionally, Rudy is a panti-waist dwarf who will need to borrow Mitt's huddle of lawyers to tell him what to do.

Ben Franklin, George Washing ton and Thomas Jefferson all advocated the same foreign policy that Ron Paul advocates. The policy of FREE TRADE and Non-Intervention. So it begs the questions. Were the founding fathers also "isolationist?" Were the founders wrong? And if the founders were wrong was Karl Marx right?

Ron Paul has been associated with the "9-11 Truthers," the people who believe the attack on the World Trade Center was an inside job. No wonder liberals support him. He is certifiably nuts.

"He supports virtually no role for the U.S. government overseas--from military defense to international trade"

Sorry, that statement is absolutely wrong. Defense and trade are the two things that a Ron Paul administration would be emphasizing, rather than the treaties, alliances, and pre-emptive overseas military adventures that the two parties have become so fond of.

Congressman Paul is NOT and isolationist. He is a stated non-interventionist. He wants to trade, talk, and interact with the world.

I will post the definition for you since so many people seem to not know the difference...

Isolationism is a foreign policy which combines a non-interventionist military policy and a political policy of economic nationalism (protectionism). In other words, it asserts both of the following:

1. Non-interventionism - Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
2. Protectionism - There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.

Not to be confused with the non-interventionist philosophy and foreign policy of the libertarian world view, which espouses unrestricted free trade and freedom of travel for individuals to all countries.

The "Almanac of American Politics" is totally distorting Ron Paul's position on so many issues. Why would you do a copy and paste without fact checking? Has American writers become this lazy?

An article in the Korea Time has it right, Ron Paul is the only Republican worth voting for!


Can someone who is involved with, and/or some of the other liberal sites, go and tell them to support, send money to, and get to the primary polls for Ron Paul. He is the only truly anti-war candidate. He also would not start new wars.

Ron Paul has earned the praise of many moderates and "liberals." Although they do not agree on economics, Paul often works with Democrats like Dennis Kucinich on specific issues and is a frequent guest on the Ed Schulz show. And although he opposes government-run health care on principle, he said he would not cut medical programs if we could fund them by reducing our overseas military spending. he is also in favor of keeping our obligations to seniors and veterans.

I agree with him. Even though helping people through government programs is not really the best way to do so, it is a much better use of funds than spending it on bombs to drop on people.

Why are people so blind? Ron Paul makes since if you actually do research on his ideas. Stop listening to the opinions of analysts on television. Their opinion is not fact! How is he more liberal? He is more conservative that Reagan, and Reagan is the golden boy of the republican party. Wake up people!

The Almanac of American Politics, 2004 edition is incorrect concerning Paul's legislative record in the 108th Congress (2003-2004). Here is the incorrect quote (from the last sentence of the above article):

"In 2003 and 2004 he (Rep. Paul) was among the most prolific legislators, sponsoring 68 bills and eight amendments. None passed."

In actuality, Rep. Paul was the successful primary sponsor (in January 2003) of HR 154 (from Thomas, which was an amendment to a bill becoming Public Law 108-138 on 12/1/2004.

JB, the federal income tax only pays interest on the national debt, not any programs you or anyone else might want. Otehr taxes (excise, corporate, etc) pay for those programs. But, we still have to honor the debt, so with the cutting of some programs (like the Dept of Education - states already have their own, who does the fed govt educate?) we can use that money to pay off the debt legitimately. Ron Paul is also committed to honoring the social security and medicare payments to those that have paid in all along, but he wants to allow young people to opt out in favor of handling our own retirement financing. IN addition, Ron Paul is a civil liberties promoter, so he has a lot in common with the left in that regard. Now, as for the economic side of things, if the left would research his positions and learn about the cause of inflation, taxation, and how those things hurt the poor and middle classes and learn what he wants to do to solve such problems, he might not only take over the GOP, but the Democratic Party as well. He's right and the two-party duopoly leadership are scared of the truth because eventually, after the fit hits the shan, everyone in America will realize it. The recession is upon us, the depression is coming soon, and Ron Paul is the only candidate that will end the war AND save the economic day.

While Ron Paul is a good man at heart, he is completely wrong on this issue.

Posted by: John D | October 10, 2007 3:07 PM

Lil Johnny Pizza D'livery boy,

Why don't you tell us all what that best "strategy" is?

More uncalled for wars?

A longer stay in Iraq?

A bombing attack on Iran (which could be considered an Act Of War by the Iranians)?

War with Syria?

War with North Korea?

WWW 3?

The possibilties for world destruction under Rudy Julieannie are endless but I have to wonder whose military Rudy would use since ours is already bogged down in an uncalled for occupation in Iraq.

Tell us which option of Rudy's you like best, Mr. Trade Rag?

Ron Paul is 100% spot on!
He wants to restore our nation's sovereignty and revive a healthy balance of power as defined by the founding fathers in the CONSTITUTION.
He is NOT associated with the "9-11" truthers.
He has directly addressed that misnomer.

what has incencsed me no end, is the outright disrespect and animosity shown Paul by other so-called conservatives.

rudy snickering at every qeustion to Paul in the debate before last was my final straw... do these idiot neocons not realize that when you insult our candidate you insult all his supporters as well?

i will never vote for hillary or obama, but i nonetheless appreciate liberals respect to Paul, which he well deserves.

asmuch as i diapprove of the spending plans (baby bonds for illegals), and racial politics of the liberal dems, i will now NEVER vote under any circumstance for Rudy after his nastyness to Paul. He joins amnesty john mccain, in the ''i will never vote for category''. My last major fallback republican candidate is Romney, althouh he is all wrong on the war, and he is also out if he ''pulls a rudy'' on Ron Paul.

now that the evangelical christians are pulling out on the neocon, nonconservative repub cadidates, you would think these clods would be in a ron paul backside kissing frenzy, because even if he turns out to only control the 3 or 4 percent of primary voters the MSM claims, that 3-4 is enough to sink the neocon nominees chances if, like my plans w/ rudi,we all sit on our hands.
We really need RP as a 3rd party candidate..this is the solution to avoid the nightmare of either hillary or rudy (how similar they really are..almost the same option, regardless which wins..just cooincidental im sure).

Some of you people are amazing. Unless that is you write derrogatory things about Ron Paul as part of an agenda? The way I see it right now we have a president/vice president with the lowest approval rating of all time in the US executive. They are notorious liars and perhaps more. Then we have a man of solid, referential integrity in Ron Paul. He has served this country in the military and in the congress with the utmost honesty ands integrity. I then come on a site and see him charcterized as a nutcase, wacko, loon..etc And I think to myself this is the reason this country is inthe shape it's in morally in politics and elsewhere. It's like some sort of insanity. If you don't want someone of honesty, intelligence and integrity representing you please leave, move to Russia cause frankly I can't handle your preference for murdering liars anymore.

I think the war was the correct thing to do and we should stay in the mid-east til all the countries are free.

When at war we are always in debt.

PAT ACT is needed cause people WANT TO KILL ALL OF US and the act let us defend against that.

As a person who has floated through 37 years of life not really caring about politics until the 9/11 tragedy, I have spent thousands and thousands of hours over the last 5+ years researching and learning more and more about our government and the history of our government. I must say that this amazing man named Ron Paul comes along and just blows me away with his honesty and views. You don't even have to be an expert in politics to know it's just plain common sense that Dr. Paul is very much a constitutionalist and dearly wants to protect and preserve our constitution and get this country back to the way it should be. It also angers me to no end the way mainstream media treat Dr. Paul. It's time for a revolution and Dr. Paul can and will lead us into a new and better way of living.

The sick, perverted little mind of John E.

Here you go, buddy:
For decades the world has tried to do something about the Arab-Israeli problem, and its extension, the deranged Arab problem of suicide bombers and terrorists. Clearly, not much worked.

But since 9/11, we have a weak, but sane government in Afghanistan. We have a weak, but sane government in Iraq. Jordan is relatively stable and has been for years. Egypt continues to be largely stable and sane. While I am not the biggest fan of the Saudis, they have been fighting Al Qaeda and been a relatively good ally in that part of the world. Pakistan's Musharraf has been a relatively good ally in recent years too.

So, we are trying to make some headway by suppporting stable, sane governments that are democracy-based and foster freedom. There are lots of good, decent, sane Arabs, but they are largely overshadowed by the terrorist element. So, how about supporting those better elements in hopes they breed more better elements so that part of the world calms down.
It isn't going to happen overnight. It's not going to happen in a few years. And, perhaps in the end, it will never happen. But it is worth a try and we have seen uneven success to date.
Iran has a loony, unstable, terrorist government. There are Iranians that would like to see Iran become a member of the sane world.
Syria, too, is a country lead by terrorists. However, at the moment it doesn't seem like Syria has the same grassroots movement toward democracy and freedom.
In regard to North Korea, well it seems the Bush plan to engage the area neighbors of Russia, China, Japan and South Korea seems to be paying off. But North Korea does seem to be in cahoots with the Syrians in causing trouble, so I do not trust the North Koreans. Clinton was burned by Little Kim. I don't think Bush will be fooled and tricked like Bill and Madeline Aldim were. But at the moment, there SEEMS to be some positive movement regarding North Korea.
The Bush administrtion has been using diplomacy all across the globe, with some successes to show for their efforts. But the spector of military might should be on the table and is on the table. I am OK with that.
Can you understand all of this, Unemployed, Living Off Mummy and Duddy in Their Basement One?

The people that suggest that Ron Paul should drop out are, in fact, Fascist. FASCIST, FASCIST, FASCIST! These are the people that need to be told who to vote for. They can not make their own decisions, they need someone else to do that. They are easily conned and brain-dead.

Posted by: John D | October 10, 2007 4:13 PM

Lil Johnny Nosedrip,

World domination didn't work under Hitler and it won't work under a Rudy Julieannie Presidency.

HA! They weren't "praising" him, they were calling him an "isolationist" instead of what he is...a "non-interventionist". No, they were bashing him out of one cheek while praising his Iraq policy out of the other in an effort to mislead their base away from voting for him in the primary and general election!

In short, they know their field of candidates are just as corrupt and transparent as the Republican field, and they are using every tactic at their disposal to plug the leaking dam.

ding said: "DR PAUL should drop out.He is wasting everybody's time . He has no chance of becoming president.One of the good things about the process is that guys like this will never be elected."

No! We should go to the mattresses with Dr. Paul regardless of how "electable" he is. As much as I admire the man, it is the ideas he espouses that are important. The longer he is in front of America, the more exposure Americans get to the positive message of individual liberty, personal responsibility, and smaller government.

There is much more at stake here than one election. This is a revolution!

What neocons don't seem to get a grip on when it comes to American Foreign Policy is where do we draw the line? It is one thing to hunt down Osama bin Laden but to go to Iraq is taking it too far.

One definition of insanity is to repeat the same task or process over and over again and expect a different outcome. Electing any of the current Democratic or republican candidates, with the exception of Dr. Paul, will give America the same outcome that we have had for the past 50 years. Haven't we had enough already? Let's try a truly different path this time-we might all be pleaseantly surprised.

John D

If you think the Saudis are blameless you're insane, not paying attention, or an outright liar.

Who attacked us on 9/11? Saudis.

Which nation is funneling the (BY FAR) largest amount of weapons, cash, and fighters into Iraq? Saudi Arabia. Not IRAN. READ THE PETRAEUS REPORT, don't just listen to Bill-o and Hannity.

To ding and John: I understand that it is a lot easier to justify your positions if you COMPLETELY ignore the FACTS. Just swallow your own filth and don't subject the rest of us to such inanity of rhetoric.

Thank you.

Ron Paul just plain out makes sense. I hear those war drums beating louder and louder everyday on both sides of the aisle. Ron Paul is emphatic on "Defense" and spending our money on our military in order for them to have equipment to be able to fight and defend themselves,but as you all know that isnot where the monies is being allocated. It is being allocated to the military complexes and to arms being given to other countries etc.. as you heard Dr. Paul saying in the debate last evening. Donot let our government officials continue with this lie when our men and women in uniform can't even get the necessary equipment needed to so call "win"(whatever that means at this point) this quagmire - clustered war. Our military arenot given the means to even keep their equipment up and running properly, yet they are told to stay and fight? I have been a registered republican conservative for 30 yrs and most certainly will change my affiliation to this party AFTER the vote for president is over. I donot wish to be affiliated with this bunch of GOP heathens any longer. Ron Paul is Spot On and He has my complete support. He is a most courageous man and who else have you seen that not only has to debate the MSM , but at the same time has to defend himself from the warmongering republican candidates. We americans see right through this whole thing and one thing is for sure and that is, when the media doesn't want me to hear someones message...That is the exact message that I want to know and hear.

Wow! A bunch of Ultra Conservatives and Liberals actually talking sense without calling each other nasty names. We've got to get the neocons out of Washington one way or another. The Constitution brings us together on at least this point, doesn't it?

Go Ron Paul!


We are Americans 1st and foremost and party affiliation(Red or Blue, Elephant or Donkey) is now trivial 2ndary. Ron Pauls message brings out in all of US the " RED, WHITE and BLUE"! :)

It's amazing how many 'reporters' don't know the difference between socialism and capitalism, isolationism and non-interventionism or that Ron is the only real republican running!

Ron Paul supports international trade = NOT an isolationist.

Your article is a lie.

The Dept of Education has only existed for about 25 years. It adds an extra layer of bureaucracy to American children's education. I know a teacher supporting Ron Paul because she wants her time back to teach, not fill out federal paperwork. By getting rid of the Department of Education, responsibility for education will return to where it belongs, in the hands of communities, teachers and parents.

I think the war was the correct thing to do and we should stay in the mid-east til all the countries are free.

When at war we are always in debt.

PAT ACT is needed cause people WANT TO KILL ALL OF US and the act let us defend against that.

Posted by: ding | October 10, 2007 4:09 PM


Perhaps you'll allow that your position is a tad simplistic?

What exactly do you mean by "free"? Who's free and who isn't? Are we to start a war with every country that is not "free" according to your standards? We'll be busy and broke pretty soon. More fundamentally, why is that our job?

As for your reference to the Patriot Act, I'm pretty sure we all agree that the goal is to not allow them to KILL ALL OF US, Mr. Understatement. The issue is whether the means -- Pat Act -- are tailored to meet that end without causing undue collateral harm to our freedoms that you supposedly support. You don't answer that question because, well...I'll refrain.

Go back to Rush. Things are more your speed there.

John D:

I'm 56 years old and well employed. Duddy is dead, and I'm supporting Mummy.

What business on earth do using our superior weapons to enforce our concept of "democracy" on other cultures? This is not only stupid; it is immoral. People who think like this are the real nutcases. How dare they call Ron Paul nuts?

As Ron Paul said recently, we were taxed to blow up Iraq's bridges, now we are being taxed to rebuild Iraq's bridges, and we can't take care of our own bridges.

They want Dr Paul to drop out because they are scared they might actually vote for him once they hear his message.

By the way, July 1st, Ron Paul had 13,000 Meetup members, and 300 groups. Today he has over 52,000 Members and nearly 1000 groups. Obama comes in a close second with 1,000 members (not groups..)..

The RP message is spreading and people are waking up. Don't stop and these dummies on TV will have to jump on the bandwagon for ratings.

Ironically, it's actually Ron Paul's detractors that made me a supporter.

I fact check as much as I can, and when I discovered that there is demonstrable misreporting in the mainstream media of Ron Paul, I began to wonder why this would be? Why fabricate? Why equate him with the "9/11 truthers"; why call him an isolationist? Why stoop to calling him "nutty" without any rational argument against his positions?

Seems that that attacks against Ron Paul often fall into 3 categories:

- ad hominem attacks

- straw-man arguments

- blatant untruths, misreporting (or deliberate exclusion)

Surely he's hit a nerve. And I thank his detractors for showing me the light.

Even if you don't agree absolutely EVERYTHING he says, (I Dont)...BUT

Till now ive yet to see a headline say Paul "flip-flops" or "Lair" ect.
Can the Dems say the same?
Can most if any other of the Top Reps. say the same?

So WHY is everyone flocking to this "Quirky" Texan?
His voting is consistent,
His views on issues DONT change.
And hes for the Constitution 100%.
The message is:FREEDOM and uncompromising CONSTITUTIONAL government that will be Transparent and answers to:
WE The People.

Thats hard Not to like.

I want to set the record straight for anyone who is reading this that Ron Paul is NOT associated with the 911 truthers movement. He is NOT.

I personally heard someone ask him about it. They asked "do you believe that the 911 truthers are accurate in their assertions that 9-11 was an inside job?"


What really makes me angry about this is that people keep spinning these lies about Dr. Paul.

He is NOT a 911 wacko, and it really makes me fume when I see that those sorry nutjobs keep attempting to advance their cause by trying to ride Dr. Paul's campaign when their's is NOT a cause he believes in.

Get it straight people!

i love to see that there are some folks out there that actually listen, and investigate the candidates that we have to choose from. way to go americans. as for you other people that do not support ron paul,, you make me sad. this country is in soooo much trouble right now, not tomorrow. this is supposed to be a government 'by the people, and for the people' and it is neither. our government is so fat and money wasting, that our forefathers, if they could see what the country they built has become, would vomit on the steps of the capitol and go inside and scream at the idiots inside and then come outside and scream at us, because we let it happen. 'by the people' that's us, and look at what we have let happen. we should be ashamed of ourselves. i am. ron paul is the man this country needs so bad. tell everyone that you talk to,, to spread the word that ron paul is the man to consider. it really is time for a revolution, and i will write his name on the ticket if he's not on it. REVOLUTION can be good.

Ron Paul is not a isolationist. Please do your research.

Ron is the last hope for the true Republican party.

The Republican party has been hijacked by neocons and neocon thinking, its sad to see. There is hope though with Ron Paul!

Interventionism is what causes wars. Ron Paul wants free trade, negations, communications, etc. with other nations. His non-interventionist policy is by no means isolationist.

As an example, amny think our "isolationism" let to Japan attacking us. Nothing could be further from the truth. Japan had no intention on somehow subverting the liberties of Americans - they merely wanted to conquer China. The embargo the U.S. levied brought this effort to a halt, and forced Japan’s government to attack the United States’ government. As Frederic Bastiat famously wrote, “If goods don’t cross borders, armies will.” Embargoes cause the misallocation of resources which would otherwise flow to their most valued use, and inevitably, war. The federal government has no constitutional grant of authority to place embargoes on trade.

Congress may regulate, but this, at least, according to the framers of the U.S. Constitution, does not extend to prohibiting trade altogether. Jefferson himself recanted the unsuccessful and self-acclaimed unconstitutional embargo of his second term.

To those who believe that Dr Paul’s stance is an 18th century solution to a 21st century problem, and thus incorrect…

You are equivalently saying that a First Amendment solution to the Patriot Act or that a Fifth and Sixth Amendment solution to the Military Commissions Act are outdated and obsolete for they are the same as you describe: 18th century solutions to 21st century problems.

Isolationist principles in U.S. foreign policy did not lead to the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor.

Guess what did: American interventionism, i.e. a lack of non-interventionist principles in our foreign policy. Our naked aggression and interventionism in the Middle East is what provoked Al Qaeda to attack the United States.

Roosevelt, with the assistance of his Democratic Congress, continually placed embargoes on the Japanese; they even convinced other countries to follow our lead (just as with Iraq before 9/11).

The proverbial straw that broke the camels back for the Japanese was the U.S. embargo placed on scrap metal and oil coming out of the U.S. Those two import industries were the lifeblood of Japan’s war machine. The sudden loss of those resources only caused the Japanese to realize how dependent they were on other countries for those resources, and thusly how vulnerable they were to the whims of foreign governments. Such vulnerability revealed the need of the Japanese for a Pacific Empire so those resources could be secured from within, making them self-reliant.

The U.S. faces a dissimilar problem today in maintaining its empire. With over 40 percent of our national debt held by foreigners, and with most of those foreign countries continually re-lending their money to the U.S. once it’s repaid; we have become dependent on that line of credit to fund our government - and our military empire that polices the world in a manner that only causes other groups or countries to despise us.

The costs of an empire will always come with strings attached. Guess what happens if China starts making demands that we don’t meet? They stop buying T-Notes. Our government then won’t be able to meet its obligations to maintain its world policing empire. They’ll then face a simple choice: either cut domestic programs (as the foreign empire must be maintained under the false guise of national security) and face the voters at the polls, or just print more money to fund out domestic programs and foreign empire. It’s really an easy choice for them. However, by continuing to print the money out of thin air to meet the obligations, we will eventually fall into a hyperinflation spiral as foreigners holding bills that constantly decrease in value scramble to buy up real assets while the government continues to inflate.

Eventually our money will be worthless, and our economy will be destroyed. We’ll have squandered America’s bounty on an empire that, ironically, has made us less safe.

Ron Paul is likable due to his genuine honesty. He is like Sleepy McCain before doing the Movement Christian Shuffle routine.

But I would never vote for Pauly; Too conservative.

I am switching parties to vote for Ron Paul. Democrats don't speak to my sense of social liberties and a conservative fiscal government. Paul fits my view better than anyone.

By the way if you are switching parties you might want to do it soon since some states' cut off time is October of THIS year.

I like Ron Paul. He does however seem a little bit CRAZY!!!

Ron Paul is against the Iraq war, against illegal immigration, and for smaller government. How much more mainstream can you get? The fact that the only candidate who lines up with the majority of Americans on the three biggest issues is considered a "longshot" ought to tell you something about the state of political analysis in the mainstream media.

To John D(umb?)

Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security.

Since the Democrats vote won't count in the FL primaries they should all change their political parties to Republican and vote for Ron Paul. This way we won't have a neo-con for Republican in the main showdown. You can then change back to Democrat after the primaries.


Wow. Despite it being so completely and obviously incorrect, and in the face of the people who've already pointed this out to others in the MSM prior to this post, you continue to brand Ron Paul an "isolationist" and even claim that he is against overseas trade. That is a complete lie on its face, and you should be held accountable to the extent that you issue a formal correction at the top of this post. It's a lie because as a reporter, you would know where he actually stands on overseas trade because you have special press access to his campaign website. That's why we rely on you to tell US what's what, because you're special.

The internet has made it impossible for someone to get away with what, at least in this example, borders on Yellow journalism. Live and learn, hm?

Liberals should be in support of Ron Paul - even over the current front runners from the Democratic Party. While Ron Paul wants to eliminate the Federal Department of Education, change the direction of Federal Social Security, and dismantle the Federal Medicare/Madicaid system - He wants to also eliminate the Central Bank which is a banking cartel in bed with our government to rob the wage earners of this country through inflation.

The reason Ron Paul wants a gold standard behind our currency - In 1910, you could buy a suit and dress shoes for $20 (one ounce of gold back then). In 2007 you can buy a suit and dress shoes for $710 (an ounce of gold today). If we backed our money with gold - we could kiss inflation goodbye.

The reason that he wants to eliminate so many Federal programs is because the Federal programs just add a layer of beaurocracy to programs that already run or would run better at the state level. The Federal Government 'help' just makes State programs less effective.

States should be free to run their own education departments. We had higher SAT scores before the Federal Department of Education was created in 1980. Also, he believes States should run their own healthcare plans and their own Social Security plans if they want - like the State of MA. He believes States should be able to allow or disallow gay marriage for themselves. And he wants to end the Federal War on Drugs so that States are free to decide what drugs their citizens may be prescribed (medicinal Marajuana).

Many of the current liberal/social policies that Democrats want would be easier to implement at the State level if the Federal government did not meddle in state affairs. Ron Paul supports a smaller, leaner Federal Government, so Democrats should vote for Ron Paul too. He is not the only candidate running as a Republican nor is he running as a Democrat. He is simply the only candidate running as an American.

S. Sherman: "Ron Paul has been associated with the "9-11 Truthers," the people who believe the attack on the World Trade Center was an inside job. No wonder liberals support him. He is certifiably nuts."

lol, And who associated him with these people? Oh thats was Michelle Malkin and John Gibson in the most blatantly malicious and dishonest piece of shit hit piece I have EVER seen passed off as a news story.

Looking at S. Sherman's quote can literally just see FoxNews' hatchet crew's words coming out fo the mouths of the unfortunately ill-informed and lazy.

Try getting off your couch and doing your own reserach on all the candidates. Thats exactly what I did when I thought there was no better candidate than Obama, and became a Paul supporter within a week.

And PLEASE...if youre going to debate a candidate's validity and positions on the issues, try getting their positions right first. 90% of the attacks I hear on Ron Paul fall into two categories:
- He's a 911 conspiracy theorist!
- He's an isolationist!

^ZERO-FOR-TWO. Really folks, if youre too ignorant and uninformed and lazy to debate candidates' opinions and positions with actual facts, or to even KNOW what their positions actually ARE...then kindly shut up and do some reading until you do.

Ron Paul is going to be a real thorn in the "main stream press". If he is a real threat to Queen Hillary he should watch his back. Remember Shu and his botched "suicide" and the seventy or so accidents and suicides in the Clinton regime.

Buddy, as a typical Lefty, clearly you have learned nothing in your 58 years. First of all, please tell me where I say Ron Paul is nuts.

Now, answer me this: If you are against us imposing democracy in IRaq, were you against our regime change and imposing democracy in Bosnia in 1998? How about us imposing democracy in Germany and Japan after WWII?

And what is typical of the brain-dead left is that none of you offered any alternatives to what I posted. Just attack. Explain what you folks would do with fanatical Islamic extremists and terrorists. And what would you folks do with regimes like Hussein, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Darfur, Rwanda? Is your solution to just close your eyes to reality? And where was your disgust for doing something when Clinton bombed Bosnia for 47 straight days, when Clinton imposed regime change in Haiti, when Clinton bombed Iraq time and time again?

social conservatives are painfully repressed, and sadly due to the peer pressure they face with no outlet, their minds and spirits twist and deform until...

1. Edison Misla Aldarondo: Republican legislator. Sentenced to thirteen years in prison for molestation of a nine-years-old.

2. Randal David Ankeney: Republican activist. Arrested on suspicion of sexual assault on a child with force. He faces six charges related to getting a thirteen- year-old girl stoned, then having sex with her.

3. Merrill Robert Barter: Republican County Commissioner. Pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact & assault on a teenage boy.

4. Robert Bauman: Republican congressman & anti-gay activist. Charged with having sex with a sixteen-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.

5. Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to thirty months in federal prison and fined $18,000.

6. Louis Beres: Chairman of the Christian Coalition of Oregon. Three of his family members accuse him of molesting them when they were preteens.

7. Howard L. Brooks: Republican legislative aide & advisor to a California assemblyman. Charged with molesting a twelve-year-old boy & possession of child porn.

8. Andrew Buhr: Republican politician, former committeeman for Hadley Township Missouri, former Tom Delay aide. Charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a thirteen-year-old boy.

9. Born Theodore Robert Cowell, this individual, under the name of Ted Bundy, would become synonymous with the term serial killer. " Bundy worked on the re-election campaign of Washington's Republican Governor Dan Evans. Evans was elected and he appointed Bundy to the Seattle Crime Prevention Advisory Committee. Bundy's political future seemed secure, when in 1973 he became assistant to Ross Davis, chairman of the Washington State Republican Party. It was a good time in Bundy's life. He had a girlfriend, his old girlfriend was once again in love with him, and his footing in the political arena was strong."

10. John Allen Burt: Republican anti-abortion activist. Convicted of sexually molesting a 15-year-old girl at the home for troubled girls that he ran.

11. Keola Childs: Republican county councilman. Pleaded guilty to sexual assault in the first degree for molesting a male child.

12. Kevin Coan: Republican St.Louis Election Board official. Arrested & charged with trying to buy sex from a fourteen-year-old girl whom he met on Internet.

13. Dan Crane: Republican congressman. Married, father of 6, received a "100% Morality Rating" from Christian Voice. Had sex with a minor working as a congressional page. On July 20th, the House voted for censure of Crane, the first time that censure had been imposed for sexual misconduct.

14. Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was charged with rape for allegedly paying a fifteen-year-old girl for sex. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women The barrage of Republican public figures having sex with minors is hard to keep track of without a program. Fortunately, The Sappho Manifesto has provided us with a program to keep track of them all.

15. Peter Dibble: Republican legislator. Pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a thirteen- year-old girl.

16. Richard A. Delgaudio: Republican fundraiser & Bush pioneer. Found guilty of child porn charges.

17. Nicholas Elizondo: Director of the Young Republican Federation. Molested his six- year-old daughter & sentenced to six years in prison.

18. Larry Dale Floyd: Republican Constable in Denton County, Texas, Precinct 2. Arrested for allegedly crossing state lines to have sex with an 8 year old child & charged with 7seven related offences.

19. Jack W. Gardner: Republican councilman. Convicted of molesting a thirteen year old girl, when the Republican party, knowing of these crimes, put him on the ballot.

20. Richard Gardner: Nevade state Representative. Admitted to molesting his 2 daughters.

21. Matthew Glavin: President & CEO of Southeastern Legal Foundation, big player in Clinton impeachment. Arrested multiple times for public indecency, one time fondling the crotch of the officer who was arresting him.

22. Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing eight- and ten-year old girls.

23. Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a . "Republican Marty"), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.

24. Mark A. Grethen: Republican activist. Convicted of six counts of sex crimes involving children.

25. Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.

26. Mark Harris: Republican city councilman who is described as a "church goer". Convicted of repeatedly having sex with an eleven- year-old girl & sentenced to twelve years in prison.

27. Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his twelve-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.

28. Howard Scott Heldreth: Anti-abortion activist who gained famed during the Shiavo media-circus. Convicted of two charges of raping a child in 2002.

29. Mike Hintz: First Assembly of God youth pastor, introduced by Bush on the campaign trail & promoted his policies. two months later, this married father of four turned himself into police, charged with sexual exploitation of a child.

30. Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to forty years in prison for molesting an eight-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.

31. Paul Ingram: Republican party leader of Turston County, Washington. Pleaded guilty to 6 counts of raping his daughters & served fourteen years in federal prison.

32. Republican activist Lawrence E. King, Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.

33. Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.

34. Jon Matthews: Republican talk show host in Houston. Indicted for indecency with a child, including exposing his genitals to a girl under age seventeen.

35. Nicholas Morency: Republican anti-abortion activist. Pleaded guilty to possessing child porn on his computer & offering a bounty to anyone who murders am abortion doctor.

36. Jeffery Patti: Republican Committee Chairman. Arrested for distributing what experts call " some of the most offensive material in the child porn world."-a video clip of a five- year-old girl being raped.

37. Mark Pazuhanich: Republican judge. Pleaded no contest to fondling a 10 year old girl & sentenced to 10 years probation.

38. Dennis Rader, otherwise known as the BTK (Blind, Torture, Kill) Serial Killer was a savage homicidal maniiac wwho murdered his many victims according to a ritualized script. When he murdered his neighbor Marine Hedge, in 1985, he quite literally took her to the Wichita Christ Lutheran Church and photographed her dad body on the altar.. To the outside world, Rader gave all the outward appearances of normalcy. He was a Boy Scout Leader; he was a member of the above mentioned Christ Lutheran Church; he was a registered Republican. He was also considered a loving father and decent family man who never the less quoted the Bible at his sentencing hearing.

39. Beverly Russell: County Chairman of Christian Coalition. Sexually molested his step-daughter, Susan Smith, who later drowned her two children.

40. Larry Jack Schwarz: Republican parole board officer & former Colorado state representative. Fired after child porn was found in his possession.

41. Tom Shortridge: Republican campaign consultant. Sentenced to 3 years probation for taking nude pictures of a fifteen- year-old girl.

42. Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a fifteen year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.

43. Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.

44. David Swartz: Republican County Commissioner. Pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of e;even, sentenced to 8 years in prison.

45. Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger allegedly had sex with a sixteen- year old girl when he was 28.

46. Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.

47. Robin Vanerwall: Republican strategist & Citadel Military College grad, Director of Faith and Family Alliance, member of Ralph Reed's inner circle who funneled money to/from Jack Abromoff to Reed. Convicted in Virginia on 5 counts of soliciting sex from boys & girls over the Internet.

48. Keith Westmoreland: Tennessee State Representative. Arrested on 7 felony counts of lewd & lascivious exhibition to minors under 16 years old.

49. Stephen White: Republican preacher. Arrested after allegedly offering $ 20 to a 14 year old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.


It's reassuring to hear the amount of support Ron Paul has among US citizens of all political stripes.

What is unfortunate is that most candidates spend their time avoiding the big issues facing our country and wag the dog--or bash Dr Paul and Fred Thompson as the case may be. This is a weak manuever that is the result of contentless campaigns.

I'm sad to say I think the two major parties have merged and become one large Tax and Spend party of Neocrats. We're all being nicely led into a nanny state run as a lowest common democracy.

American Idol is less fake than our elections the past few years. Choose Freedom! Watch the polls and vote Dr. No!!!


i am so tired of this canard about how terrible the federal government is...

the greatest achievements in the USA over the last 200 some odd years have all been products of the federal government...

the union stood tall when millions of evildoers attempted to destroy this nation for the sake of sexual sadistic pleasure derived from forcing other human beings to live as tho less than human...

the federal govt stood tall against right-wing republican admiration for hitler and maneuvered this country into open conflict with nazism and fascism...

and the south still resents us for it... grow up... it's like a baby brother hating his older brother for dragging him out of a crak house...

you ingrateful bastards!

over and over again the greatness of the united states has been saving the knuckle-dragging citizens from themselves...

The Ron Paul Revolution is coming. Join us or get run the F*&k over. Real Americans are taking this country back. The Founding Fathers would be loading their guns right now....

Isn't it interesting that everyone that is against Dr. Ron Paul, cannot write anything at length, that makes any sense. Especially smack a republican, you don't punish innocent people for the evil ones. You should smack yourself first for even writing that silliness. The worst part of all is that republicans and democrats actually believe the parties are separate. The only separate one is Dr. Paul. I worked for the Federal Government for 2.5 years and left in disgust. The yes people rise and the real honest workers never get promoted because who else will work in the department of 20 other people who "deserve" a job, "deserve" a pension, and never get fired. Wake up, they are one and the same.

Your reference to trade in your statement "He supports virtually no role for the U.S. government overseas--from military defense to international trade" is PATENTLY WRONG.

What part of military non-intervention, but trade, communicate and travel don't you understand?

It is obvious how you are trying to subvert the arguments of Ron Paul by blatantly lying. I would sue you for libel if I wasn't any busier.

More Swamp censor inconsistencies:

This is OK:

Posted by: s | October 10, 2007 9:03 PM

Yet, twice as an example of what to expect from journalists today and in the future, I noted a recent headline from the student paper at Colorado State University that said (but the word spelled out, I just used astericks to be clean) Taser This: F*** Bush.

So, tell me, Swamp censors why a factual news item, cleaned up for here, gets censored and not posted, yet John E.'s, er "S's" post of slapping Republicans so we wake the F up is OK?????

Every person who is against the continued war/occupation of Iraq should go to Ron Paul's website and donate $25.00 if for no other reason the longer he is in the race the more the Republicans have to confront the issue during their debate. He is the lone antiwar Republican and should get help from all, Republicans, Democrats or independents that want to bring the troops home.

I changed my party affiliation from Dem to Repub to vote for Ron Paul. I have been a democrat for 30+ years. I am being active in his campaign also. I'm 50 years old and I've never felt so positive about any presidential candidate. I even gave the guy money. I am meeting many younger folks since I have been involved and am very impressed with their smart outlooks and young wisdom. You guys have been teaching this old guy a thing or two. If folks are not behind Dr. Ron Paul, you haven't done your proper research or you just refuse to do what is right for this country and YOUR future. I'll be dead in 15-20 years, this RP campaign is one of the most important things you can do for YOUR future. Thoughts of my kids and grandkids made me switch over to support Dr. Ron Paul. Thanks for reading my post. Mike, Fort Wayne, IN. US Army Vet and DAV.

ding (bat)

Your statement:

"DR PAUL should drop out.He is wasting everybody's time . He has no chance of becoming president.One of the good things about the process is that guys like this will never be elected."

Your statement interpreted:
We should just put the Constitution in a museum. It's an inconvenience and wastes everybody's time . A person that strictly follows the Constitution has no chance of becoming president. One of the good things about the process is that guys who strictly abides by the Constitution will never be elected.

That's pretty much what you said. If you disagree then you obviously don't know much about Ron Paul or the Constitution.

This former dem voting registered independant female is voting in her first primary as a republican for Dr. Ron PAUL!

Why??? cuz Ron Paul would end the iraq war, not start new preemptive wars, would abolish the IRS, end the war on drugs, would decriminalize marijuana, legalize medical marijuana, and make hemp a legal industrial crop.

He would also return america back to the gold/silver standard, and eventually abolish the Federal Reserve. Thus ending the "inflationary tax" on the middle class.

Dr. Ron Paul is truly "Hope for America"

His voting record is impeccable. Google him.

Some things to clarify about Ron Paul’s positions:
- He favors a strong defensive posture at home and using limited, but targeted, action against the terrorists.
- He argues against the notion of Empire-building and nation-building (which are both strongly interventionistic). Paul’s foreign policy views are based on economic engagement, while interventionism is a back-door way to manage and control markets at the expense of international commitments and military protectionism.

Arguably, Ron Paul does not get much time to expound on the problems associated with interventionism, but there are many. There are well over 50 documented Empires throughout history. All of these, save the current American Empire, have been vanquished, squandered, and bankrupted. Many of them have been lost to rampant inflation and economic turmoil, domestic strife, or military folly. It would be foolish to think that America would not go the way of other empires.

- The costs of preserving empires are extravagant, in both the protectionistic racket that must be funded to preserve the empire (think South Korea, Africa, parts of Europe), and the political costs of keeping U.S. troops on foreign soil (think Japan and South Korea).

- There is no guarantee that nations within the American umbrella will remain loyal; in fact, a number of them are going off the U.S. currency in favor of other ones. China owns a huge stake in the U.S.; and China can use this to help leverage its economic position relative to the U.S. (Some believe this is happening now.)

- Traditional conservatives, such as Paul, fault the international banking system and the Federal Reserve for trying to manage, artificially, what should occur naturally in a commodities’ backed system.

- Now, the root of Paul’s issue with the American Empire is that it is not morally right to continue borrowing to preserve an empire we cannot afford. Eventually, the costs create inflation (which is what we’re seeing now) and a weakened dollar. The middle and lower classes get squeezed, lose their mortgages, etc. The next generation will have a difficult time making ends meet.

- And there are other costs. A security state begins to develop at home because there are few good jobs to be had, other than ones that help the empire succeed (security jobs, defense jobs, etc.). The executive government swells. The legislative branch of government becomes distracted from domestic issues to ones of warfare. The economy becomes distracted--infrastructure is neglected, businesses are lost, etc. The people become polarized. And our national sovereignty diminishes as the rule of law and the Constitution are abandoned as inconveniences that would thwart the empire-builders’ ambitions.

- The key question is not how to fight terrorism, since many more efficient means could be arranged to do this than taking over the mideast. The key question is, can Americans afford to expand the empire, and what costs will have to be incurred by the taxpayers, and their children, to do so?

umm no chance of winning
ron paul has already succeeded
in making a fracture in the republican system now we have democrats republicans and liberal republicans good job id say and strange enough
librepub sounds more like the old time republicans id say...
i.e. refer to him as a libertarian republican from now on help make it stick.

It's nice to see the BS party lines disappearing, in here,(well, somewhat.) Ron Paul is an American and so am I. I am voting, American!!!!

Ron Paul 2008!!!!

This "writer" Frank James…must define "Isolationist" as: Not using brute force military action to force "Democracy" on any country we want when ever passible. We should be the worlds “decider” and keep all those “misguided” countries under the US iron fist… I guess...

Non-interventionist is defined as something else apparently. Most "Anti-RP" people have been having a very hard time differentiating these two terms. It makes me wonder if the misuse of this term is intentional.

“Isolationist” is such a "catchy” term and has so many negative connotations. Maybe if you say it enough it will become true? Hey Frank, you really think people that stupid? I think many are either stupid or like to live life in conflict, but using the term to mislead people is really 3rd grade for someone that writes with a decent “sentence structure.”

Do your homework and get back to me.

One definition of insanity is to repeat the same task or process over and over again and expect a different outcome. by "Vincent"

One definition of sanity is the ability to ignore reality. Insane people can't stop thinking about all of the atrocities plaguing humanity. You have to be able to walk down the street and whistle Dixie knowing that people are being murdered every hour on your behalf. I'm a huge Ron Paul supporter. I hope his ideas get through to any of the other politicians.

Most forget the people who attacked us on 9-11 moved here legally. They most likely had background checks by the FBI, smiled nicely for their visa pictures, flew here and lived in a nice sunny neighborhood. There's absolutely nothing at all stoping a crazy person from legally buying an assult weapon, getting lots of bullets and visiting your local mall.

That's where Ron Paul is right when he says bring the troops home. I mean what good are troops protecting North Korea while our borders are wide opened? Wouldn't you like our borders to be that secure? We need security at home. We won't get it bombing poor 3rd world countries. It takes local law enforcement to catch the type of criminal terrorists that are trying to kill us. If we have beefed up security at home, it doesnt matter if Iran builds a suit-case nuke. We'd find it by putting more money towards our own security. Not towards securing other nations. Plus if were not on their turf, they have no reason to want to kill us.

What good are all the aircraft carriers in the medaterranian sea against that kind of enemy? We need Ron Paul, he's the only guy talking common sense.

There is something fishy about an organization who just discredited a decorated war veteran, who Ron voted to censure, turning around and making an ad like this. I mean, this organization exists just to be a GOP hate fest right?

I don't think this has to do with party lines but some cunning strategy on the part of who I would never trust.

Libertarians are really just Republicans who want limited anarchy. And Ron Paul proved it by running as a Republican. Like a neo-con, Paul believes free trade should dictate because corporations are always right, moreso than our government! I agree with him we should withdraw from NAFTA, Paul wants that so we can have even more economic freedom so companies can even further exploit the world.
Non-interventionist, right.

Like most all libertarians, he wants the government limited just enough so he can roam this land free with his guns and do whatever white Americans want.

I just hope his supporters aren't naive enough to believe he's not a politician and will keep his campaign promises anyway. He's like the Republicans' Kucinich: he'll never win. Of course the other slick talking old fart men (Fred Thompson and McCain are too old to get elected) are worse. Although I hope Tancredo nabs the party's nomination. Those will be the most entertaining presidential debates of all time.

Guilliani is an Authoritative Fascist, Hilary is a Communist/Socialist, Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist. The two on the top are going to drag America down. Ron Paul speaks for the people and naysayers have got to realize that we are a democratic republic. Meaning all of us Ron Paul supporters are Americans and we vote and have a voice. To discredit Ron Paul, you in turn are discrediting the voice of American voters and the backlash will be tremendous. His movement will continue even if he isn't elected, and whether you stand in the way or are a part of it. Liberty and freedom are not going to be swept under a rug any longer!

Traditional conservatism holds these principles dear:

- limited constitutional government
- personal privacy
- personal responsibility
- strong national defense
- fiscally responsible government
- individual liberty

That is nothing like what we have going on today with the ex-Trotskyite neoconservatives who have hijacked the conservative movement.

There are two real conservatives in the race. Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul. Both good men. I am supporting Ron Paul, because he has shown through his 10 terms as a Republican Congressman, that he walks his talk. Go read his speeches and check his votes. The man is the Thomas Jefferson of our day and is the only person who can beat Hillary in the general election.

“ his heart and in his head, in his character and in his intellect, in what he has done and in what he will become, the Thomas Jefferson of our day, Ron Paul is one of us!" --Judge Andrew Napolitano

As liberals see the undermining of the Bill -O- Rights by big-government conservatives, with the help of big-government liberals, some of them are realizing the threat of the growth of government power and are doing some reassessing. Some of my liberal friends are, anyway.

Posted by: Roger C. | October 10, 2007 3:17 PM

Smart liberals know that liberalism will not function in a police state (even if Hillary is running it), much less a bankrupt one that constantly at war.

Historically, the U.S. has had a healthy tension between liberal and conservative elements. Liberals have little to fear from Dr. Paul, who is a real human being who demonstrates intelligence and compassion in all that he does.

As for Dr. Paul's stance on a number of issues ...

Look up the Grace Commission Report. Flip to the conclusion of that report. "In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.” Income taxes do NOT fund anything in the federal government.

What would we lose by getting rid of it and the fraud that drives it? Nothing. What would we gain? A lot!

The IRS is NOT a part of the federal government. One example: Look at the postage on any letter you receive from the IRS. It will say something like: "Postage and Fees Paid by IRS". U.S. Government agencies have "Franking privileges" and don't pay for postage. The Post Office knows that the IRS isn't a government agency, why don't you?

Ask yourself who they really are?

Look up the OMB number found at the upper right corner of a IRS form 1040 - the number is not valid - it is only a "proposed" number and has no expiration date as ALL valid numbers are required to have.

Go to the IRS web site. Look up the "Privacy Act Statement and Paperwork Reduction Act Notice", 3rd paragraph down. "Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information" (such as a form 1040) "if it does not display a valid OMB control number."


On May 12, 2006 in Peoria, Illinois, the attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) begged the court to dismiss all charges against IRS victim Robert Lawrence in federal District Court.

Mr. Lawrence used Privacy Act of 1974 as the complete defense for not filing tax returns and the IRS & DOJ "begged" the court to dismiss their own case (161 counts!) rather than have their fraud on record!

While there is NO LAW making people pay the Income Tax, you can volunteer to do so by signing a 1040 or other document. Your choice.

Dr. Paul is simply the only candidate with the guts to suggest that the fraud be done away with!

When Nixon got rid of the last silver in money, one dollar was worth one ounce of silver. It now takes ~$13.50 to buy that same ounce of silver, which means that the dollar is only worth ~7 1/2 cents in comparison. The dollar is rapidly losing against all major currencies around the world because it is backed by NOTHING, which is why Bush and friends want the Amero to be currency of all of north and south America so that his debt will be hidden in all the other countries.

(See CNN - Larry King Live where ex-president of Mexico Fox talks about the plans he and Bush made to do this!)

The US government web site even discusses doing away with congress and the supreme court and replacing it with a regional council.

When Bush came into office the national debt was 2 Trillion dollars, it is now over 9 Trillion dollars! What did he spend that (your!) money on? It wasn't spent on this country with it's falling down bridges! It wasn't spent on the medical care given our troops, or don't you remember the Walter Reed hospital scandal?

So, just where did 7 Trillion dollars go?

You either vote for and protect Dr. Paul, or you have no money, no borders, no government and no jobs.

Understand, IF Dr. Paul wins, there will be a strong effort made to kill him before he can undo the plans of the traitors who swore to "protect and defend the constitution", but have done everything in their power to destroy it.

Again, the choice is yours.

The Best option America has is Dr. Ron Paul.

I really, really don't want to see the second best option come to pass ... you don't either!

When any politician says that they didn't know about something, or that it wasn't intended to happen that way, remember this:
"In politics nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way"
-- President Franklin D Roosevelt

"So, tell me, Swamp censors why a factual news item, cleaned up for here, gets censored and not posted, yet John E.'s, er "S's" post of slapping Republicans so we wake the F up is OK?????

Posted by: John D | October 10, 2007 10:30 PM"

John 'The Crybaby' D,

Why are you constantly running to mommy (Mark) over the results of your own insults and stupidities?

You remind me of the old sandbox parable;

There's a group of children peacefully playing in a sandbox. They are joined by the neighborhood spoiled rich kid, who immediately begins to throw sand in everyones eyes.

Finally, growing tired of it, another child throws some back and the spoiled brat goes running home in tears to mommy. Boo,hoo,hoo!

What you did say:
RP doesn't accept Medicare or Medicaid.
What you didn't say:
Even though he doesn't accept these forms of payment, he doesn't turn these people out into the street; HE TREATS THEM FOR FREE. (It's true, look it up)
What you did say:
He wants to end all government funding of education.
What's wrong with that?
He only wants to end FEDERAL GOVERNMENT funding of education (most education is payed for by state and local taxes anyway).

Also- you referred to Paul as an Isolationist a few times, he's not. He beleives in free trade with all nations. He beleives our policies of nation building and policing the world should be replaced with NON-INTERVENTION. I expect reputable journalists to understand the difference...I guess that's what happens when I get my news from some stupid online blog put out by...wait, baltimore sun? The name leads me to beleive that this is an actual 'real life' news publication. If that's true, I'm severely disappointed. Newspaper fact-checkers have apparently been replaced with the gossip columnists from US Weekly.

Lets help get Ron the 12 million he has requested to compete with the corporate cronies.

From a Republican for truth, civic virtue, responsibility, and accountability in Government

Ron Paul supports free trade.

Free trade is NOT isolationist.

I could never vote for any of those chicken hawks and made-for-TV personalities that pass for candidates. I held my nose and registered Republican just to vote for Ron Paul and he gets my vote even if it has to be a write-in.

You have got to be kidding, Paul a conservative? He may talk the talk, but he doesn't walk the walk. He votes against border security, he votes against restricting abortion, he votes against funding our troops in war, he wants to legalize drugs.

There is a reason why Liberals like Ron Paul.

Putting the US dept of education out of business is not a nutty idea. Republicans used to advocate that until the self-described neoconservatives took over the party.

And if you think that his gold bug ideas are strange, read what Alan Greenspan wrote about it in his 1960s essay "Gold and Economic Freedom".

And if you still think that his ideas on the Fed are odd, just read what Milton Friedman (nobel prize winner) has written about Fed policy.

''You have got to be kidding, Paul a conservative? He may talk the talk, but he doesn't walk the walk. He votes against border security, he votes against restricting abortion, he votes against funding our troops in war, he wants to legalize drugs.''

Paul opposed all the phony amnesties for illegals that mccain and julieanni FAVOR~
Paul has DELIVERED 4000 babies as a doctor and is 100 pct PRO-LIFE and always has been unlike rudi''govt will pay 4 your abortion '' julieanni~

Paul isnt going to pay to occupy (with a mere 150,000) the third world and call it a ''war'', hes going to deport illegals and enforce the borders, and mind our own business.

the bush, julieanni, mccain plan was to pick sides in every dispute, reap ''donations'' from PACs affiliated w/ the side you are a proxy of, and then act shocked when their policies make us party to all the worlds disputes=
YOU are a globalist neocon who has been convinced by their media pawns that u are ''conservative'', but you dont even understand the difference between a foreign neocon and an american conservative.

RON PAUL ROCKS! I have always considered myself to be a Democrat but this man is absolutely AMAZING! I support him 100%! Some of you out there really should do a little research instead of buying into whatever the mainstream media feeds you! George Bush is the worst president ever and should have been impeached a long time ago! My personal opinion is that the representative of our country should be able to give a speech correctly and without blunder. I have yet to see that from our current president. It is such an embarassment. On the other hand, Ron Paul is an excellent speaker, he speaks the truth, and I believe, if given the chance, can back it up. BE SMART.......VOTE FOR RON PAUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist. He is a noninterventionist, meaning: he believes as Thomas Jefferson did “commerce with all nations, alliances with none.” This would make us neutral country for the first time since WWII and better for it!!!
Ron Paul is a very intelligent man, a real man not afraid to think outside the current political box and speak his mind. He wants to return us to the American principals that made this country great. He connects with people because he is about service to the people and for the people. The same way, medical doctors once where in this country.

Thank you, Dr. Paul for bringing my political beliefs to light. I pray you save us from the tyranny of special interests, MSM and career politicians.

Go Paul Go! ^*^ Go Paul Go! ^*^ Go Paul Go! ^*^ Go Paul Go!

Ron Paul is the best candidate out there. People consider him crazy because he's neutral on many federal issues. It's assumed because he doesn't believe the Federal Gov't shouldn't get involved he must necessarily be complicit in it.

He's not for legalizing prostitution, or legalizing drugs, he just believes it's a state issue and the federal government should but out because of the cost. He doesn't think abortion should be legal personally, but he will allow the state to make the choice. He wants to give YOU, the people, the power to choose. Frankly, people don't want that responsibility, they want a socialist country to make decisions for them.

You have got to be kidding, Paul a conservative? He may talk the talk, but he doesn't walk the walk. He votes against border security, he votes against restricting abortion, he votes against funding our troops in war, he wants to legalize drugs.

There is a reason why Liberals like Ron Paul.

Posted by: J.Langley | October 11, 2007 11:55 AM

Yes, Ron Paul is a conservative, and we’re not kidding either. And, yes, he does walk the walk.

He voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006 See:

Is that what you meant when you said he “votes against border security?”

For your information, Dr. Paul still runs a small OB/Gyn practice. In his days off from Congress, he delivers babies. He is no friend of abortion rights activists. That is why he voted for the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, even though he believed it might be unconstitutional on 10th Amendment grounds.


Is that what you meant when you said he “votes against restricting abortion?”

And, yes, he votes against further funding of the war because he wants to get the U.S. out of Iraq. Then again, he also voted against authorizing the war in the first place. See He is consistent.

Furthermore, staying out of elective foreign wars had been a consistent part of Republican foreign policy for the greatest part of the 20th Century. Bush, with his militant, Wilsonian views is the exception to Republican foreign policy. So, tell me: How is Ron Paul’s view on the subject something only a liberal can love?

Finally, Ron Paul does not favor “legalizing drugs” as much as he favors ending “the war on drugs” as currently conducted - because it is a dismal failure. And, you know what? It is a dismal failure. Drug trafficking and use is just as rampant as it ever has been, and we, the American People, have paid dearly in lives, treasure and our liberties in the failed attempt to eradicate them. What Ron Paul suggests is an alternative approach to the problem, allowing the States to fashion their own rules for dealing with drug interdiction and treatment, and getting the federal government out of it.

BTW, the only things currently classified as drugs that he advocates legalizing are: 1) Industrial Hemp, for use in making things like ropes and fabrics; and 2) medical marijuana. This is a far cry from your claim that he “wants to legalize drugs.”

J Langley: You're either lying, incredibly ignorant, or trolling. All you have to do is search his voting record to see how he consistantly votes regarding abortion. Border security? He is consistent there also: bring troops home and defend our borders and stop illegal immigration instead of starting unconstitutional wars abroad. Legalize drugs? He says prohibition doesn’t work and causes crime. It's time for a different approach. Please educate yourself on these issues.

NeoCons are traitors, every last one of them.

Too funny! I've never seen so much "shooting in the foot," and "foot in the mouth" as people trying to argue against Ron Paul. And if they're not spouting lies, they're calling him names! We're on to something here, people!

It is so nice to see people from both sides of the isle get off the Media/Military Industial complex "Merry-Go-Round" for once and unify on the importance of One Nation unified on the principals of our Constitution.... Our constitution provides us with the liberties of taking back (by force) if necessary, Our government.

It is time. Please place your individual preferences of: Color, Race, Religion, Sexual preference and hand outs of the day on the shelf, so the politicians and media will stop using those issues to keep us divided as a people, and please push this Ron Paul freedom train all the way to the White House....

Only then will we even have the slightest chance to have our soverignty and rights returned to us.

JB calls Dr. Paul "someone who has advocated to abolish the federal income tax (not just cut taxes, mind you)"

But if abolishing personal income tax revenues amounting to X dollars is done while at the same time eliminating 2X dollars in war spending, then rather than a "cut" wouldn't that be effectively an X dollar increase in taxes available for non-military purposes?

"Ron Paul has been associated with the "9-11 Truthers," the people who believe the attack on the World Trade Center was an inside job."

Passive verb alert! Who "associated" Ron Paul with the Truthers? Fox News. It was just devious reporting and editing of a chance encounter at an open house. He has gone on record repeatedly that he does not think 9/11 was an "inside job." He even said so on Fox News. He does allow for the possibility that the investigation may have covered up government ineptitude.

Ron Paul is a good man and speaks the truth.
We did great for over 100 years without a federal income tax. Now our entire federal income only pays the interest on the national debt to private international bankers. If you want more of the same and worse, vote for any other candidate. If you want to buck that trend and start something new Ron Paul is there.

I thought i'd never vote for a republican but now i cant vote for anyone but Ron Paul! The ONLY politician who we can trust to be honest for once!

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security"
Benjamin Franklin

"An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot. "

"That government is best which governs least."

Thomas Paine

I think Ron Paul holds the beliefs of the founding founders at heart. What other candidate can truthfully say that ?

My Whole Family is Voting For Ron Paul

Re:Ron Paul has been associated with the "9-11 Truthers,"

You say this only because Alex Jones has interviewed him on his radio show. That's like saying the "top tier" candidates associate themselves with murder, rape and crime in general because they appear on the news. Your comment was really ignorant.

Ron Paul draws more people to his speaking engagements than all the other candidates. Gotta give it to us, we're getting the word out! Let's double our efforts and get him elected! (Oh and we're becoming delegates in our States out, we know the process).

RON PAUL is the only hope this country has left.

His views stand for everything the foundation of this country has been created on. With pure honesty, truth and principles these other candidates do not stand a chance.

This is why he is not being mentioned by the media. Ron is a threat to the entire system. All the corruption and profits being reaped from the current administration will no longer exist if Ron is elected president.

The future of this country resides with Ron Paul. If he doesn't become elected, the inevitable decline of this country will take place. RON PAUL RULES!

For those who might like more info:
(1. National Threat)
(2. True cost of gas)
(3. America: freedom to Fascism)
(4. The Secret Government...)
(5. Truth about Giuliani)
(6. CIA drug dealing)
(7. Civil Liberties Lost)
(8. Money Masters)
(9. Iraq War: Legal or Illegal)

I have become so saddened by the political mess this country is in I refrained from even writing comments for fear of later retribution. But the comments on Ron Paul give me hope . Its very nice to have hope again lets ride this revolotion to the White house . Really I think we have allot of time and the more the word gets out on Ron Paul the more unstopable this train will be .
Keep the message alive

For those who might like more info:
(1. National Threat)
(2. True cost of gas)
(3. America: freedom to Fascism)
(4. The Secret Government...)
(5. Truth about Giuliani)
(6. CIA drug dealing)
(7. Civil Liberties Lost)
(8. Money Masters)
(9. Iraq War: Legal or Illegal)

Over at lonestartimes .com there are a bunch of neo-con Paul haters. Bombard them with the message and tell them we are sick of their ways!

Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "v" in the field below:


News, but funnier


Those were the days
More Handelsman
Editorial cartoons



Iraq War 5th anniversary


Campaign trail



Your Obama IQ