RSS 2.0 FeedRon Paul On Bill Maher
by Doug MataconisAs usual, Bill Maher was an idiot but Congressman Paul acquited himself pretty well in the face of a series of really stupid questions:
“In Republics, the great danger is, that the majority may not sufficiently respect the rights of the minority.” James Madison
April 3, 2007
• • •
30 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
He answered every question Bill Maher gave him, no matter how sardonically Maher phrased them, very well. I wanted to punch Maher every time Ron Paul answered his question with a well thought answer and Maher said “still against the Civil War though” before moving onto the next question.
Ron Paul didn’t say he was for secession or slavery, he simply said he believes the war could have been avoided.
I probably wouldn’t vote for Paul, but I like that he is willing to question the necessity of many things that we have come to assume are necessary.
Comment by Adam — April 3, 2007 @ 2:37 pmIt’s pretty amusing to watch one self-described “libertarian” (who isn’t one) interview another self-described “libertarian” (who also isn’t one).
When will we actually have self-described libertarians (who are ones) interviewing real libertarian candidates?
Or is that too much to ask for?
Comment by Brian Miller — April 3, 2007 @ 2:52 pmBill Maher is an ass.
Comment by Neil — April 3, 2007 @ 2:58 pmThat anyone takes Bill Maher seriously shows just how shallow, ill-informed, and gullible folks are.
Comment by Alan — April 3, 2007 @ 6:15 pmSomebody should have told Ron Paul that this was a Comedy Show; that it was okay to tell a couple jokes or at the very least smile once in a while.
This was perhaps the worst performance ever by a libertarian Presidential candidate. Well, second worst: Nothing could ever beat David Bergland’s absolutely pitiful performance on ABC’s Nightline in 1984.
Ron Paul came across as looking old, out of touch, and entirely un-hip.
Discussions of the Civil War and the Gold Standard may be appropriate for the History Channel or PBS, but HBO???
PLEASE give us libertarians who know how to act in front of a camera: Neal Boortz, Wayne Root, PJ O’Rourke, John Stossell, Tammy Bruce, et.al.
Comment by Eric Dondero — April 3, 2007 @ 7:17 pmListen people, Eric (above this comment) has posted the same biased, ill-informed, blind-eyed comment throughout many different message boards. He is most likely some disinfoist who is out to ridicule Ron Paul and his noble character. I guess these days, old fashioned liberals with conservative ideals are not “hip” enough for the new generation of arrogant fools such as Eric Dondero.
Comment by Infowarrior — April 3, 2007 @ 9:56 pmNo worries, Infowarrior… He’s been around here long enough that we’ve figured him out. We’ve taken to beating him upside the head with his own rhetoric (or I have, anyway)…
Comment by Brad Warbiany — April 3, 2007 @ 10:25 pmInfowarrior,
Whoever has hired him is obviously not getting their money’s worth.
Besides honestly, Ron Paul isn’t worth the effort at polling at only 1% so the “man” has to send their worst disinfo operator.
Comment by Kevin — April 3, 2007 @ 10:36 pmNeil,
The most concise and straight to the point statement on this thread. Dead on accurate as well.
Comment by Kevin — April 3, 2007 @ 10:38 pmKevin,
Where was Howard Dean at this point in the race four years ago. I would venture a guess that he wasn’t hardly registering either. If his mouth wouldn’t have gotten in the way he actually might be our current President now.
Don’t count Dr. Paul out yet. If he can get enough buzz going and then do well in the early primaries he has a chance to possibly win and if not win at least make a pretty big splash.
I have been seeing him more on some major media shows and he is handling himself very well. Those had to be some of the most idiotic questions someone could ask a presidential candidate, especially from someone who thinks of himself as a libertarian. Bill just because you like your drugs doesn’t make you a libertarian. What is more telling is that nearly every point he brought up he was calling for more big government. Dr. Paul handled these questions/points very well, especially the civil war question, considering they were idiotic questions to begin with.
Comment by TerryP — April 3, 2007 @ 11:57 pmWhat a bunch of ridiculous posts! No wonder Libertarians are such losers. Dr. Paul says everyone in the House agrees with him about something at some point. What an excellent way to look at it! If Bill Maher identifies with Libertarians, as do many in show business, you don’t see opportunity, you see an assault on the purity of your ideal set!!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!! Quit whining and send Dr. Paul a check!!!
Comment by gneiss — April 4, 2007 @ 12:05 amHere, arm chair warriors!!! Is this concise and to the point?
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/forms/contribute.cfm
Your Bill of Rights is shredded and Bill Maher is your gatekeeper. Can your ideals compete with the fundraising skill of the Clintons?
Comment by gneiss — April 4, 2007 @ 12:17 amRon Paul is a seasoned congressman who has given many of his own speeches on the house floor. I’m sure he’s dealt with much worse than an asshat like Bill Maher. Although Maher was mean and offending during the interview, it was nice that he forced out new discussion about the necessity of the civil war. Most people don’t know the real history of the civil war, and if they do, it’s not the whole story.
Comment by blardy — April 4, 2007 @ 3:02 amEverything I’ve read about Eric Dondero points to him being a chicken hawk who used to work for Ron Paul but is now butt hurt and hateful because Paul doesn’t share his hawkish attitude.
So every time something on Dr. Paul comes up, Mr. Dondero makes the same comment, that Paul is “old and out of touch, like McCain” and mentions over and over again his low presence in polls.
Aren’t there any other tunes on that record or is it going to be the same old song and dance?
Comment by Chris — April 4, 2007 @ 11:35 amI don’t agree with Dondero on the war, but I will give him this much – he is NOT chicken hawk.
From what I gather, he is former military, and a prerequisite for being a chicken hawk is sending other people to fight while you watch. At least he put his ass where is mouth is (unlike most of the people who are behind this debacle).
Anyway, for the first time since Goldwater we have a candidate for president who absolutely will shrink government dramatically if he’s elected. He’ll do it with the bully pulpit and the veto pen. He has the record to prove it (unlike Reagan did) and he’s serious about it (like Reagan was not).
Yet, we have libertarians supporting candidates who have no chance (like whoever the LP candidate is) and libertarians supporting big-government Republicans (like the rest of the GOP field).
And we wonder why we never get anywhere.
Comment by Chris in NJ — April 4, 2007 @ 4:15 pmChicken Hawk, Hawk, w/e. It doesn’t change the fact that his comments are reminiscent of a butt hurt child with a grudge.
Comment by Chris — April 4, 2007 @ 4:43 pmI agree with you there.
There are enough real chickenhawks out there, though, so I’ll at least reserve that term for those who deserve it.
Comment by Chris in NJ — April 4, 2007 @ 7:24 pmMaher mocks Ron Paul for saying the civil war was unnecessary -does he suggest war was the only appropriate solution then? Funny how people are strongly opposed to the war today yet mock those who don’t consider it acceptable back then…
Sounds like a combination of hypocrisy and prejudice toward those not “approved” by one’s political platform.
Comment by Steve — April 4, 2007 @ 7:27 pmWho interviews a presidentail candidate and does not even say the word “IRAQ”!!??!!??!!??!
Comment by Jay — April 4, 2007 @ 8:07 pmAs far as I can tell he is the only one that voted against the war in the first place and would end it immediately.
Ron Paul was dead on. Bill Maher is idiot, and he was defending governement control. Anybody that doesnt agree with Ron Paul needs to re-evaluate why they are an American. Bill Maher sounded like a communist if you ask me. How could anyone argue against free enterprise???? = communism/socialism. wake up.
Comment by Federalist Publishing — April 4, 2007 @ 9:38 pmDid you notice Maher’s instant reaction when Dr. Paul stated that there are many scientists who aren’t drinking the global warming koolaid. He shouted at him and made a joke, but essentially left the message that there are no qualified scientists who don’t agree with Al Gore on global warming. Why is it that liberals react in horror when someone suggests that the debate on GW isn’t over?
Comment by LessIsMore — April 5, 2007 @ 10:55 amRon Paul and other libertarians don’t know what they’re talking about regarding global warming. However, global warming would be solved if Ron Paul and others like him took the reins of government. Ron would immediately and all the subsidies for oil and gas, including the troops in Saudi Arabia. Prices would escalate as oil and gas companies would have to compete on the free-market. As prices took off, entrepreneurs would scramble to come up with green alternatives. I wish Ron Paul and other libertarians would talk about free-market rather than bashing scientists. I support Ron Paul for President, despite his incorrect views of global warming.
Comment by USA liberty — April 5, 2007 @ 5:47 pmThose Libertarians who are trying desperately to find something they don’t like about Ron Paul, are missing a great opportunity.
For the first time in our lifetime, we have a legitimate opportunity to make a real change in this country, if Ron Paul is elected. He has the experience and integrity that no other candidate has.
If we join together, and get Ron elected, it will finally give Libertarian principals the attention we have all been hoping for and open the door for other Libertarians to get elected.
“Opportunity is rare, and a wise man will never let it go by.”
Comment by Dan — April 6, 2007 @ 1:21 pmI agree, Dan.
It has been my impression that pretty much all constitutionalists/freedom lovers have (in the past) had a high regard for Ron Paul. How can we not, with his record and efforts in Congress?
I would hope there were also a certain percentage of Republicans who are horrified with, or at least concerned about, the direction Bush has taken us in the last 8 years.
Part of Ron’s appeal to anyone, I think, is the consistency of his actions in Congress. What you see is what you get. In our current political climate, that is a breath of fresh air.
Comment by smtwngrl — April 6, 2007 @ 4:42 pmBill Maher obviously feels safer with big brother.
Ron Paul won’t have a chance unless he convinces the electorate that his foreign policy is superior and will make America safer. The news media has already preselected the candidates it wants to win. We have a variety of options on how we move forward at this pivotal point in our history, thankfully. We won’t have the excuse of not having options this presidential election cycle.
He is more convincing in explaining his stances than the other political candidates. I believe that will serve to his advantage. He has a strong conservative record, hopefully the electorate can look past the rhetoric of the mainstream media and make an intelligent decision.
Comment by uhm — April 6, 2007 @ 10:40 pmWell that was an interesting exercise. I read the responses before I watched the youtube video. I was pleasantly surprised!
Dr. Paul was concise, humble, and intelligent as well as articulate. If he can maintain that poise in the debates and throughout this calendar year, he’ll make quite a splash.
Comment by KCW — April 10, 2007 @ 12:04 pmI agree! I have never voted in 11 years, and I’m voting for Ron Paul, who I have admired for years.
He’s the only person in the government that doesn’t believe in government! Well maybe there are others, but they all go ahead and use it to their advantage anyway.
I really think he’s handled himself very well all over the place. I have a feeling he’s going to make most of the other candidates look like slimy liars.
Obama is the only one I’m worried about. He’s got jack for experience and he’s a socialist, but he comes across as being darn genuine, which is very unusual.
Hillary doesn’t have a chance, which is at least one good thing.
Go Ron Paul.
-Chad
Comment by Chadism — April 10, 2007 @ 4:33 pmAlso the fact that he is a doctor AND a Vietnam vet will immediately set him apart as interesting.
Add to that the fact that he’s so consistently constitutional in his voting record and I can’t imagine him not making a huge impact at very least.
Americans are bored of mainstream candidates.
Comment by Chadism — April 10, 2007 @ 4:39 pmWell Chad, if Dr. Paul’s last obstacle becomes Barrack Obama, then this country will be poised to make a seismic political shift.
Comment by KCW — April 11, 2007 @ 10:00 amI will vote for Ron Paul. Imagine how many powerful groups he would disempower – The Federal Reserve and the Zionist/Anglo-American Imperialist warmongers for starters – and those people do not mess around. Therefore, I believe that if Dr. Paul starts showing enough strength in the polls, the powers that be will either discredit him or possibly assasinate him.
Comment by Steve — April 15, 2007 @ 1:36 am