Thoughts, essays, and writings on Liberty. Written by the heirs of Patrick Henry.

“We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes nonwork.”     Milton Friedman

February 8, 2008

What Happens If Ron Paul Supporters Infiltrated Other Campaigns’ Delegates?

by Brad Warbiany

The Ron Paul campaign is increasingly looking like it’s a done deal. With Romney dropping out, it’s likely that we won’t see a brokered convention, the one potential route to his campaign having any more legs. Intrade has McCain now trading at a 95 share price for the nomination, with Huckabee and Paul both trading below a 2 share price.

But, in true form, the Paulestinians haven’t given up hope! After all, what if McCain’s delegates don’t vote for McCain at the Convention? What if, as commenter Kevin Houston points out, they’re really Ron Paul supporters who infiltrated the delegate pool in order to vote for their own man?

I appologize for being such a poor communicator myself. I did not mean to imply that the people filling McCain’s delegate slots were true-blue McCainiacs who could somehow be convinced to give their precious votes to Ron Paul.

I meant to imply that the people filling McCain’s delegate slots were true-blue Paulunteers who simply *said* they would be happy to support McCain (or Thompson, or Romney, or whoever) Especially in LA, where McCain had trouble filling delegate slots at the end.

Kind of like what happened in WV, where even though Huckabee ostensibly won all 18 delegates, 3 of those Huckabee delegates will actually be voting Ron Paul at national convention.

I promise you it will happen in my state too. The primary vote doesn’t mean crap. Only 3 delegates are awarded by the primary vote. The other 24 are elected at county conventions. Some of these counties (like mine) don’t have *any* functional GOP organization. It is wide open to the first yahoo that says he wants to do the work (like me.)

It doesn’t matter if Ron Paul comes in 2nd, or 3rd, or even gains enough of a % to be entitled to a single delegate. My state will have at least one vote for Ron Paul (legally if it looks like he can hang on through the first ballot)

So let’s explore this one for a moment. Let’s say that somehow McCain doesn’t win the nomination outright and it goes to the convention. Let’s then say that all hell breaks loose and there’s enough Ron Paul supporters who infiltrated the delegate pools that Ron Paul wins the nomination. What happens then?

If you think the American people in general, and the Republican Party in particular, will take kindly to seeing their nomination process “stolen” by Ron Paul supporters, you’re nuts! Especially if it’s by self-proclaimed libertarians, those who favor the “rule of law”, behaving in an absolutely underhanded manner.

If Ron Paul supporters were to “steal” the nomination for their candidate, it would fly in the face of most American’s sense of fairness and decency. And if the Democrat’s response to the 2000 election is any indication, Republican voters would be so angry over the situation that they would allow Hillary or Obama to reach the Oval Office simply to spite Ron Paul, or McCain would then run as an independent and they’d follow him.

Seriously, guys. It’s over. He’s not going to win. He’s got a lot of supporters, and it’s time to take that support and turn it into a wider movement. Perhaps the Paul Congress movement might be a good place to focus? 30-40 or more people in the House of Representatives with views similar to Ron Paul could go a long way to making real change. It’s time to start working on doing good in other places, because Ron Paul will not be elected President in 2008.

TrackBack URI: http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2008/02/08/what-happens-if-ron-paul-supporters-infiltrated-other-campaigns-delegates/trackback/
Read more posts from
• • •

144 Comments

  1. The scenario described is extremely unlikely to happen, but I don’t see anything “underhanded” about it. No one is talking about breaking the law (where it binds delegates to a candidate for the first round or two in some states), or even violating the party’s own rules.

    If no one wins a majority on the first ballot, most of the delegates become free to vote their conscience. If their conscience tells them that Ron Paul is the best hope to save the republic, that’s who they should vote for.

    If the Republican Party later has a problem with that (which they undoubtedly would), they should change the rules for the next election. Anything else is just sour grapes.

    Comment by Craig — February 8, 2008 @ 9:32 am
  2. who are you trying to convince here? whoever is still actively supporting RP should instead hope he concedes right now and use the rest of the money for some kind of foundation-esque thing? most of RP’s donors sent the money so that he could run until the end.

    Comment by oilnwater — February 8, 2008 @ 9:34 am
  3. All’s fair in love and war…& this has been nothing but war. If the GOP can change rules(LA), rig voting machines(NH), and blackout on exposure for Paul throughout the primaries, then why would you cry when the same tactics that you currently employ are used against you? This is about taking America BACK! Any revolution is certainly bad for those already in power, why would now be any different? Stop crying about possibly losing the convention and suck it up…you just might have to lose this time. The people are tired of not being heard…we will no longer sit back and let you steal America from us. Silence us at your own risk, the fight is at hand. Liberty or Death…it’s really powerful when you mean it.

    Comment by Dave — February 8, 2008 @ 9:37 am
  4. But, in true form, the Paulestinians haven’t given up hope! After all, what if McCain’s delegates don’t vote for McCain at the Convention?

    Cut it out already. A simple google search would show that this has always been part of the plan. A brokered convention was always viewed as a distinct possibility and we’ve been preparing for it. It’s an extremely long shot, of course, but it’s always been on our radar.

    If the Republican Party later has a problem with that (which they undoubtedly would), they should change the rules for the next election. Anything else is just sour grapes.

    Indeed. We’re playing by the rules, Doug. The rules are obviously archaic, but they are what they are. You want to change them after the game is underway? How does that make you any better than the Dems that cried about losing 2000 despite winning the popular vote?

    Comment by Jeff Molby — February 8, 2008 @ 9:43 am
  5. What I want to see, is Mccain come to his senses and get Ron Paul on board as his running VP. That way all the people who hate Mccain but support Ron Paul (I.E. the strong conservatives/libertarians/independents)which just so happen to be the large group of voters Mccain is missing, would be willing to vote McCain just to see Paul in charge of the House.

    Comment by Josh — February 8, 2008 @ 9:43 am
  6. The CPAC people were booing Mccain. Those are the people who will be casting the vote at the GOP convention.

    Comment by Dung — February 8, 2008 @ 9:51 am
  7. A vote for McCain is a vote for Hilary or Obama. As a Canadian I see Ron Paul surprising a lot of people come GOP convention time…it ain’t over till the fat John McCain sings

    Comment by mike s — February 8, 2008 @ 10:01 am
  8. Underhanded?
    The media blackout on Ron Paul isn’t underhanded? I’ve got a copy of the GOP Convention Rules and the GOP Rules for Delegates here at my elbow. When we get to the Convention, all bets are off. Ron Paul’s name *will* be put into nomination, and he *will* have an opportunity to address the Convention and the world in prime time. There is no quit in most Ron Paul supporters I know. We will be in St Paul for the Convention. In the meantime, McCain’s record has months to be scrutinized. Hopefully, the truth about his “heroism” while a guest of the North Vietnamese will get the kind of public airing it deserves, and his campaign will go down in flames like his old fighter jet did.

    Comment by Ronsouthjersey — February 8, 2008 @ 10:02 am
  9. McCain obviously has no chance to win the presidency. Thus there must be some other plan in progress here. No guy who stands up at a political rally and sings bomb bomb Iran should be or could be the senior statesman of the most powerful country in the world. And if so, we are all in big big trouble. Do you really think we or he will get respect from our other world neighbors? The press can take down McCain any day of the week, so what are they waiting for? At the moment, the Democrats have the fall election hands down. McCain offers little or no resistance. The GOP will be stranded without a “credible” (by MSM terms) possibly at the last minutes of the race? Being good GOP sheeple, we will be lead to a slaughter. I suggest we take Ron Paul seriously. He offerers a real resistance to domination by the democrats as well as much need recalibration of our dutiful servants, the government!

    Comment by Guesswhotoo6 — February 8, 2008 @ 10:05 am
  10. God, what a bunch of drool. This page is a joke.

    Comment by GeneG — February 8, 2008 @ 10:06 am
  11. First off Ron Paul would not be McCain’s running mate. their foreign policy, tax & civil liberty ideas are polar opposites.

    Secondly, A McCain presidency not only is akin to a 3rd Bush term; but the rate we’re going will make the U.S. the antagonists of WWIII

    Comment by Jeffrey — February 8, 2008 @ 10:09 am
  12. “All’s fair in love and war”…so this is what it comes down to? Paul, supposedly the most principled of any candidate in either party, winning by some kind of Machiavellian “ends justify the means” strategy? That it’s ok for Paul supporters to resort to whatever tactic necessary to win on the grounds that “they (the GOP) did it first” (the old “playground fight defense”), so we’re absolved?

    Comment by SC — February 8, 2008 @ 10:11 am
  13. My friend, you need help when it comes to defining what steal and fairness means. But let’s start with the simple fact that you are not in the running for a Pulitzer any time soon. Seriously dude, it’s over!

    Comment by shunaki — February 8, 2008 @ 10:11 am
  14. Hmm Brad, you sound so angry and upset> It could be that in the winner take all states, some RP supporters have voted to be a delegate. Speaking about the rule of law and honesty: wait till the GOP finds out what they have done in Louisiana, which Paul clearly won, with such a ridiculous practise. Well, you also have to bea rin mind some delegates are not always 100% sure of their candidate, and may be persuaded during the RNC to vote for Paul, instead of McCain, for example. The media blackout coverage on Paul and lies being told are simply undemocratic. There is a saying: he who laughs the last, laughs the best!

    (BTW: In case McCain gets the GOP Nomination, who tells you Paul could not then run Independent and secure not only the conservative base, but also Independents and some Democrats (those that hate Hillary and were strong against the war int he first place) as well as Greens even?)

    Comment by Stefan — February 8, 2008 @ 10:15 am
  15. Black sheep candidates have won the nomination before. The elders of the party are not as unified in opinion as you would make us think.

    This is simplistic analysis and does little justice to the possibilities of the convention. Primaries really don’t mean shit, they never really have. This is just the first time that there has been disagreement enough for this process to kick into gear.

    Read some history of pre WWII conventions and it will become clear.

    Comment by evin — February 8, 2008 @ 10:16 am
  16. I’m supporting Ron Paul all the way through the convention. There is no alternative for me. I wouldn’t vote for McCain or Huckabee to be dog catcher let alone President.

    I’m offended by your use of words like “infiltrate” and “steal”. We have participated in the process just like every other Republican only we haven’t had any support from the GOP.

    I don’t vote for a political party; I vote for the person I think will do the best job. If more people would act like citizens instead of party groupies; our country would be in much better shape.

    Peace, Liberty and Prosperity, Ron Paul 2008!

    Comment by MME — February 8, 2008 @ 10:18 am
  17. 100% agree with you. he’s not going to win anything. we do have a brilliant opportunity to get things going in the house. i think the next 4 years will be some of the toughest in history and that could be the platform we have been waiting for.
    the work starts now though!

    Comment by rob dee — February 8, 2008 @ 10:18 am
  18. The Paul Campaign has stopped pushing the brokered convention nonsense. RP Forums and Daily Paul sites have become unreadable because of this self-delusion.

    The tea leaves are obviously pointing to a LP Party run. LRC is pushing it now. The Cato guys Paul has brought into the campaign are pushing it. Bob Barr introduces Paul at CPAC. Uncommitted is winning the LP primaries. Paul on his conference call indicated he is absolutely committed to take this to November if the money is there, too much of an opportunity to pass up.

    Most LP members, of which I am one, would support Paul if he decided to run LP. Not all LPers, but most.

    Comment by Kaligula — February 8, 2008 @ 10:19 am
  19. Ron Paul will not win?

    Ron Paul is winning!

    Ron Paul will win.

    It all depends on the perspective.

    Nice try, pal.

    Comment by Matt — February 8, 2008 @ 10:22 am
  20. Fairness and decency?? FAIRNESS AND DECENCY??? You’ve GOT to be kidding!! If the American public was truly concerned about fairness and decency, they long ago would have protested the unfair and indecent treatment Dr. Paul has received from the mainstream media throughout this election. Fairness and decency? Dr. Paul is the ONLY candidate who has shown even the slightest bit of fairness and decency. The only true conservative, the only honest man running. He deserves our support until the absolute end of this election!

    Comment by Susan — February 8, 2008 @ 10:22 am
  21. Underhanded is not following the Constitution! Underhanded is the Fed. using inflation to decrease wages and power of the people. Underhanded was the Iraq war. Underhanded is the media black out why are they so against him, is why everyone should be for him like NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN care about the American people, HA! Ha HA! Ha! Ha! Ha! HAAA! Ha! Ha. That’s funny you think that? Everything to restore the country properly is righteous and must be done. Ron Paul can and will get a majority of Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Can we talk about just the issues and act like this is American Idol?? Based on the issues only if Ron Paul, was any race any gender any religion he would still be the only choice for President. Yes, your right many Ron Paulateers have infiltraited the Romnulames, the McVain’s and Huckster’s more than you think, there is a plan. Ron Paul will continue to build his cabinet with the best and brightest. Ron Paul has huge support from the military too. As to the question of Paulateers quitting, would George Washington quit?

    Comment by EDLFWood — February 8, 2008 @ 10:26 am
  22. You also have to take into account the fact that McCain received the anti-war vote in NH etc as well as on Super Tuesday. Some people are just so ignorant. They probbaly think that as McCain was more left of centre, with criticism on Bush and a maverick, he is more anti-war. So wait till the RNC till these people – as delegates – find out that McCain is actually the war-monger and Dr. Paul the prince of peace and king of reason!

    Comment by Stefan — February 8, 2008 @ 10:27 am
  23. I was an independant until i stumble upon Libertarian ideas. That is what woke me up, then Ron Paul came along and told the government we want them out of our lives. There was no greater moment than hearing it in person at the university of minnesota with 4000 other people. The point is that his stance is libertarian and republican or libertarian republican which seems to be the thing everyone points out online.

    The LP is a good choice, we could pick up a more stable base because it is already set up and running at full steam. Ron Paul has garnered more money and more support than any other third party candidates, and its not being made into history by the MSM, like it should be. Ron Paul believes in civil disobedience, to get the point across. I say the more the merrier and can we put him on the papers for lp and still have the Republican voters?

    Comment by Libertas — February 8, 2008 @ 10:28 am
  24. I’ve stated this before…

    Huckabee and paul will get romneys delegates… then they will comprimise to beat mccain.

    So look for Huckabee and Paul as running mate.

    Bloomberg will run independant with McCain as running mate

    Comment by indopus — February 8, 2008 @ 10:32 am
  25. Where did the shithead mccain nazi troops come from? On a liberty page spamming the only liberty candidate on stage (RON PAUL). I really don’t like saying i told you so all the time. Said it with Bush and saying it with Mccain. If he gets in prepare for the ultimate in fascism. (hitler type) and When Paul gets in i think a month in quatanimo with the prisoners with no phone calls is just the thing for all you nazi’s. Including Bush, Cheney and all his buddies. Do unto others as you would have done unto you is the most powerful phrase that should be used. Lie to us(get lied to) Torture us(get tortured) bomb us(get bombed) Get the point, Get real and stop with the brainwashing. Actions speak loader than words. Look at mccains words (match them with his vote) And i dare you to do that with Dr Paul Also. What comes out of his mouth is actually in written bills in congress hidden from our free ears. Wake up!!!!!!! opensecrets.org

    Comment by doug — February 8, 2008 @ 10:34 am
  26. However, we have to remember if he solely focus’s on a third party run we will be pulling mainly republican voters, which will almost exactly give the dems a win, something we can’t have happen. We have to be very careful and right now staying the course no matter how looming must be held, but wait till march. There is so much that can happen. What happens when his VP comes out. what if limbaugh starts hounding him, worse than he already has, what happens when hilary and obama and Ron Paul start attack ad campaigns. (less on the RP side but you know what i mean) every one saw CPAC. lol Mccain is not as strong as he thinks he is, under pressure a lot of pressure the media will eventually comply.

    By that i mean that he will start having problems in debates, less air time, the more and more people bring up the fact that he is on the top ten most hated US politicians. (in the US of course.) and to beat he has a worse war policy than Pres. Bush.

    Comment by Libertas — February 8, 2008 @ 10:38 am
  27. Life? yes.
    Liberty? Yes.
    Property? Yes
    Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time? Hmm. Nope!
    Defending individual freedom and liberty, one constitutional step at a time. YES…

    Have you ran out of anything positive to write? Say like, major issues that we American face. Let me guess, either you are a tool or you are afraid of the TRUTH. If you would only OPEN YOUR EYES! You might just see…

    Cheers…

    Comment by Leonardo — February 8, 2008 @ 10:45 am
  28. “underhanded” – total BS — that’s how the establishment “stole” Ron Paul’s first in Louisiana – well, maybe – so if it’s good enough for the goose, it’s good enough for the gander!

    Remember – this is a Consitutional Republic – NOT a Democracy…enjoy the show!

    Comment by Aaron — February 8, 2008 @ 10:55 am
  29. If Ron Paul does not win the Republican Nomination and goes on the Independent Ticket, there is a way to secure a huge support from the Democrats. That is by selecting Dennis Kucinich as his VP. They have both openly supported each other, and on several occasions. That would be the monster ticket that would rock this country and bring it back to life. It would be more refreshing and bring a newer look than O’bama could ever bring. It would bring balance in Washington, and our liberties would be restored one by one. Think about it! GO RON PAUL!!

    Comment by Jason — February 8, 2008 @ 11:04 am
  30. Jason,

    See this is one of the thing that you hard-core Ron Paul people say that makes the rest of us question what you’re really all about.

    There is absolutely nothing libertarian about Dennis Kucinich. He’s a socialist. He believes in universal, government-provided health care. He’s against free trade. Outside of opposition to the Iraq War he and Ron Paul have absolutely nothing in common.

    The idea that the two of them would make a good ticket that could present a coherent message, or that they could govern together in the incredibly unlikely event that they won, is simply laughable.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 8, 2008 @ 11:07 am
  31. What’s the difference. We will support Ron Paul whatever he runs for – not only because he’s the man but also because we believe in Freedom, Peace and Prosperity.

    We are collecting links to articles like yours at http://www.WhatTheySayAboutRonPaul.com for all the latest reporting about Ron Paul.

    At this time it is even more important to show that the support for Ron Paul is still growing.

    Did you know that you can go to http://www.WhatTheySayAboutRonPaul.com and post links to your own articles about Ron Paul as soon as you make them available online?

    Comment by Lars — February 8, 2008 @ 11:07 am
  32. I agree with you completely. We need to turn the Paul grassroots presidential campaign into a more long-term movement, besides there’s only so much a president can do without congressional support. As for this presidential election, I will write-in Ron Paul before I’ll vote for either of the slimy politicians that do gain the nominations.

    Comment by Joe — February 8, 2008 @ 11:17 am
  33. If Bush and mccain believe so firmly about this war. Then Email them and tell them you want to see their children there. fighting side by side with the rest. and i can say that because. I was there. And its my understanding that mccain while getting shot down and held as a POW gave allied intelligence to the enemy that cost American lives. Talk about that will you.

    Comment by doug — February 8, 2008 @ 11:19 am
  34. I think the comment that McCain might run third party and actually have support is quite funny. Frankly, if conservatives have any principles left whatsoever, McCain is set to lose the election for Republicans this year.

    Comment by Travis — February 8, 2008 @ 11:19 am
  35. doug,

    To be fair, both of John McCain’s youngest sons are in the miliary,and one is in the Naval Academy. His other children are all too old for military service having been more in the 50s and early 60s

    Barack Obama’s children are in grade school, no word on whether they play with toy guns.

    And do you really want Chelsea Clinton in the military ?

    Personally, I think this is a nonsense argument but at least get your facts straight before making it.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 8, 2008 @ 11:27 am
  36. It’s about his message, not about winning…so quit crying chief.

    Anyone with a pulse who really researches Ron Paul would at least agree with a lot of what he has to say.

    Good luck to everyone voting!

    Comment by Winner — February 8, 2008 @ 11:29 am
  37. doug,

    And its my understanding that mccain while getting shot down and held as a POW gave allied intelligence to the enemy that cost American lives.

    No real indication of that. The information taken from him was under extreme duress so I tend to be somewhat forgiving about what he did or didn’t volunteer…everyone breaks under torture eventually. He also passed up a chance at being freed early when the Vietnamese offered it to him because of who his family was (father and grandfather were full admirals), abided by the Code of Conduct to the best of his ability, and was honest about what he did there in his autobiography, so from what I’ve seen he was far from a coward or a traitor during his service in Vietnam.

    I’m no fan of McCain the politician, but McCain the Navy pilot served his country honorably.

    and i can say that because. I was there.

    I served in a warzone too…but I wasn’t captured by the enemy and I wasn’t tortured to the point of death over a period of years, so I’m not in any position to be calling McCain a coward. Unless you were in captivity with him and went through what he went through, neither are you.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 11:39 am
  38. LibertyPapers can you be any more irrelevant. You don’t even understand what liberty means. Do you think we have liberty in this country now? Well if you do then cased close – you’re completely irrelevant.

    If you don’t think we have liberty in this country then how can you criticize the “Paultards” for continuing to fight for their liberty despite overwhelming odds? Again – you are completely irrelevant.

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 11:41 am
  39. “…..Republican voters would be so angry over the situation that they would allow Hillary or Obama to reach the Oval Office simply to spite Ron Paul, or McCain would then run as an independent and they’d follow him…..”

    Nature follows order, and systems work themselves out.

    This could not be more true with your statement.
    A Real Republican running for the republican party, and a non-republican being forced to run as a 3rd party candidate.

    The bias inherent to the system worked itself out to death – by violating the core principles of republicanism so much, you pushed people of the same party to “hijack” its vote.

    He may not win in this 3-way scenario, but he would certainly send the republican party to its roots to reconsider why it lists socialists as candidates for nomination.

    And that would be a good thing.

    Comment by Kurt — February 8, 2008 @ 11:43 am
  40. See this is one of the thing that you hard-core Ron Paul people say that makes the rest of us question what you’re really all about.

    I think you meant to say “some of you hard-core Ron Paul people”.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — February 8, 2008 @ 11:44 am
  41. Jeff,

    Fair point. You’re not the type of supporter I’m talking about.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 8, 2008 @ 11:45 am
  42. Vote how you like. I’m a precinct leader and plan on being at my precinct for delegate nominations. I’ll vote for what’s required of me, but after that, all bets are off and I’ll be voting for Ron Paul. “Stealing”? LMAO. Yeah, Republican’s don’t have much room to talk after 2000 and 2004. If it just so happens that Ron Paul bows out entirely, I’ll resort back to my original party and elect Obama or Clinton. And so will many other Republicans and former Democrats that I’ve talked to. McCain is the worst choice for American. We are not stupid, as much as you’d like to believe.

    Comment by Tyranny — February 8, 2008 @ 11:45 am
  43. KUTGW,

    If you don’t think we have liberty in this country then how can you criticize the “Paultards” for continuing to fight for their liberty despite overwhelming odds?

    Considering that most of the Paulestinians/PaulTards I’ve met here tend to hate immigrants, hate open borders, support the welfare state, hate bankers, hate foreigners and dream of “punishing” the mainstream press for not sucking off Ron Paul, I’d argue that none of you has a clue of what liberty or freedom are about and it’s pretty tough to take your criticisms seriously.

    But maybe if you keep whining a little more we’ll change our minds :)

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 11:49 am
  44. “If you think the American people in general, and the Republican Party in particular, will take kindly to seeing their nomination process “stolen” by Ron Paul supporters, you’re nuts! Especially if it’s by self-proclaimed libertarians, those who favor the “rule of law”, behaving in an absolutely underhanded manner.”

    Americans and Republicans are very used to having the nomination process and the election and their money and their property and their liberty stolen from them. I don’t think most Americans would notice or care if a different Republican from Texas took the Republican nomination.

    As has been the case for many months now, Ron Paul’s campaign is “almost done”. Hmm….Giulani? Gone. Romney? Gone. Thompson? Gone.

    Ron Paul is now the #3 candidate for the Republican nomination. Strange how y’all insist he has no chance – yet he’s beaten three “top tier” candidates. If the other remaining candidates drop out at the same rate as the last three Paul will take the nomination.

    Ain’t going to happen. Nor are the delegates going to pick him. He won’t get the nomination. I still voted for him.

    He also won’t get the Presidency. I will still be voting for him.

    This is the Ron Paul Revolution, not the Ron Paul Campaign. Y’all might be playing for temporary control of the White House, we are fighting for permanent control of America.

    “30-40 or more people in the House of Representatives with views similar to Ron Paul could go a long way to making real change.”

    Nope. That’s not even a substantial minority of the House. Real change will not come about from inserting Ron Paul or other republicans into a particular office – witness Paul’s zero bills passed record. Real change will come about from many millions of Americans waking up to the truth about fiat money, the income tax, war, rule of law, principles of liberty etc.

    Until we hold all of our representatives accountable for their actions getting any number of favorable candidates will have little to no effect.

    Comment by Patriot Henry — February 8, 2008 @ 11:52 am
  45. I think many of McCains delegates are Ron Paul supporters. It’s funny that the system is fearing their own system.

    Comment by Chester — February 8, 2008 @ 11:54 am
  46. Im no fan of McCain but his record as a solider should be left alone. He served this country with honor and was subject to tortures no human should face.

    That being said, McCain the politician would be the worst President ever!! We dont need more of the Bush us against them crap!!!!
    The country is broke, my 60k a year feels like minimum wage here in NYC . No way I vote for a guy who just list names when asked any question regarding the economy! WAKE UP PEOPLE!! Vote for the issues for everyones sake! We wont get a second chance with this one!

    Comment by NIck — February 8, 2008 @ 11:56 am
  47. “See this is one of the thing that you hard-core Ron Paul people say that makes the rest of us question what you’re really all about.”

    Yep – they are clearly all about Ron Paul, or at least their image of Ron Paul, which is just a different form of people’s image of Romney or Clinton or any politician. It’s hero worship and evidence they are detached from reality. Many Ron Paul supporters are flat out deluded.

    The difference between Ron Paul’s supporters, or at least some of them, and the supporters of other candidates and politicians, is that they don’t support Ron Paul for being Ron Paul. They support him for his principles, not his personality or image. My support for Ron Paul is conditional, based on upon his actions. Those who believe Kucinich is a good idea are the same as those who believe any other politician are a good idea. Ron Paul is not a good idea, he is a good man with good ideas. Should his ideas or character change then he loses my support.

    The majority of Ron Paul supporters are ignorant fools – but that is a reflection of America and not Ron Paul.

    Comment by Patriot Henry — February 8, 2008 @ 11:58 am
  48. Patriot Henry,

    Ron Paul is now the #3 candidate for the Republican nomination.

    Wow…number three in a three-person race, and he’s won less delegates than the guy who just dropped out. Gosh, that’s impressive.

    Strange how y’all insist he has no chance – yet he’s beaten three “top tier” candidates.

    “Beating” somebody in an election means that he’s either winning primaries or placing high enough in most primaries to win a substantial number of delegates. He isn’t. He has less delegates than a guy who dropped out because he was going broke. Ron Paul is only in this race because he still has money, and he’s done jack-shit with it.

    This is the Ron Paul Revolution, not the Ron Paul Campaign. Y’all might be playing for temporary control of the White House, we are fighting for permanent control of America.

    Uh huh…interesting how you bring up the phrase “permanent control of America” to describe the goal of your efforts. That’s generally an objective of one who wishes to quash all dissent.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 12:02 pm
  49. First of all this batlle will be a long one.Think about This is not the first time Ron Paul has ran.We need to go to the convention and stick to the rules. We need to learn the systems. We need to meet the power brokers. We need to act like professionals at all times when we go. No matter how it goes ,it should be a great time going to the GOP convention.
    BTW I have not met any Paultards yet in my work on the campaign in Georgia all the folks that I have meet have been liberty loving folks.

    Comment by Doug Craig — February 8, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
  50. How about we just wait untill andfter all the states and primaries and caucuses are over before we start calling out the winner. I dont hear anybody telling huckabee to drop out too much. Ok if everybody is so sure McCain is going to win the nomination than quit worrying about Ron Paul.

    Comment by Nick — February 8, 2008 @ 12:07 pm
  51. Nick,

    That being said, McCain the politician would be the worst President ever!

    I don’t think he would be good, but I think he would be less-bad than Bush. In fact, I think that pretty much every remaining candidate in both parties would be less-bad than Bush.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 12:08 pm
  52. You hard-core McCaintards are crazy!

    Comment by Nick — February 8, 2008 @ 12:14 pm
  53. Quit obsessing about McCain

    Comment by Nick — February 8, 2008 @ 12:14 pm
  54. Yeah True.

    Comment by Nick — February 8, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
  55. Considering that most of the Paulestinians/PaulTards I’ve met here tend to hate immigrants, hate open borders, support the welfare state, hate bankers, hate foreigners and dream of “punishing” the mainstream press for not sucking off Ron Paul, I’d argue that none of you has a clue of what liberty or freedom are about and it’s pretty tough to take your criticisms seriously.

    But maybe if you keep whining a little more we’ll change our minds :)

    Great argument you’ve got there Crawford – just throw out a bunch of complete falsehoods to support your argument and then polish it off with personal attacks and name calling.

    First of all, I can’t speak for all of the “Paultards” as you like to call us but let me clear a few points up for you:

    1) Paultards hate immigrants. Paultards believe in enforcing laws against illegal immigration and not providing incentives to illegal immigrants. As an immigrant myself, it seems strange that I would support Ron Paul because I hate myself.

    2) Paultards hate open borders. Ron Paul has stated many times that he finds the idea of a border fence offensive. He just doesn’t believe illegal immigrants are entitled to government entitlements. In your simple view of the world somehow that equates to hating open borders because it doesn’t gel with your flavor of libertarianism. Great stuff Crawford.

    3) Paultards hate bankers. Us Paultards are not opposed to bankers we’re opposed to the private Federal Reserve System and it’s habit of expanding the money supply to service debt. We’re opposed to fiat currencies that cause inflation. Somehow this opposes liberty in your simple view of the world and equates to hating bankers. Good job Crawford.

    4) Paultards hate foreigners. Not sure where you come to this conclusion. Being a foreigner myself, once again it would seem like a strange position to support a candidate that hates me. Does opposing military intervention in other nations equate to hating the foreigners? Because we would rather not bomb other countries and not mess with the internal affairs of other nations because we disagree with their way of life? In your simple view of the world I guess that means you hate foreigners. I guess all the other countries in the world that exercise a foreign policy of non-interventionism or neutrality hate foreigners too? My what a scary world it must be for someone like you Crawford.

    5) Paultards want to “punish” the mainstream press for ignoring Ron Paul. Here we go again with another complete fiction. The only “punishment” I’ve heard of is voting with our wallets by tuning out and not paying for biased media outlets that ignore Ron Paul in their coverage of the election. Is that wrong in your simple world view too?

    Clearly you’re a little confused about the Paultards, Crawford. Maybe it’s you that deserves to have “tard” affixed to their name?

    Crawtard. Sounds pretty good to me.

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
  56. Funny how history repeats itself. These are the same things that were said about Lincoln.

    Comment by nada — February 8, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
  57. UCrawford,
    We’re not looking for somebody “less bad” though right now we are deciding who we think best fit to be president

    Comment by Nick — February 8, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
  58. This is all theater, preplanned for your viewing pleasure. It is obvious that the media wants a Hillary vs. McCain presidential run, when the real battle is Obama vs. Ron Paul. They are vote fraud forcing the real candidates right out of the arena.

    Hail McHillary, Supreme ruler of all the world.

    Comment by Viva la Revolution — February 8, 2008 @ 12:23 pm
  59. I think the Libertarian movement and Ron Paul’s antiwar libertarian/conservative network need to focus on electing anti-statists to Congress.

    The Liberty Congress website profiles many good candidates running as Libertarians or as Ron Paul Republicans, including Dr Murray Sabrin for Senate in New Jersey. See it @ http://www.libertycongress.org

    Comment by Gene Berkman — February 8, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
  60. I don’t think he would be good, but I think he would be less-bad than Bush. In fact, I think that pretty much every remaining candidate in both parties would be less-bad than Bush.

    Don’t be too sure. I think he’d just be a different flavor of bad.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — February 8, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
  61. McCain served honorably? Maybe, maybe not:

    McCain was kept at the Hanoi Hilton from December 1969 until his release, along with all the remaining POWs, in March of 1973. During this time, T translated all the Vietnamese interrogators’ notes and reports regarding John McCain.

    According to T, they reveal that McCain had made an “accommodation” with his captors, and in exchange, T’s father saw that he was provided with an apartment in Hanoi and the services of two prostitutes. Upon returning to his prison cell, he would say he had been held in solitary confinement. That may be why so many of his fellow prisoners said later they saw so little of him at Hoa Loa.
    http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/3068/2/

    Comment by John Newman — February 8, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
  62. Ron Paul all the way. And even afterwards even if he doesn’t win. It’s about our personal freedoms and carrying the message out to every individual in this nation.

    For the Revolution!

    Comment by DatONEFoo — February 8, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
  63. Jeff,

    Don’t be too sure. I think he’d just be a different flavor of bad.

    No, I’m very very certain that George W. Bush was a special kind of idiot. McCain may be power-mad and mercenary and a hypocrite, but the guy isn’t stupid and he’s got a pretty solid understanding of how the federal government works (even if he uses that to advance his own personal agenda). Bush has consistently been a failure at every job he’s ever had, he’s never shown an ability to learn from his failures, and he only got away with it as long as he did because nobody ever held him accountable for being a fuck-up. Compared to Bush, McCain is Einstein.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 12:37 pm
  64. John,

    Don’t waste our time with conspiracy bullshit. The author provides no hyperlinks or documents that can be cross-referenced and in the same article the fucking loon who runs that site claims that the CIA is a liberal left-wing organization. I’ve seen crazy homeless people that have more credibility than your link.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
  65. KeepUpTheGreatWork- Haha, Crawtard sounds pretty good to me too. Flows just nicely.

    Doug M- I wouldn’t say that the idea is laughable. They share similar foreign policy and monetary policies as well. Lincoln filled positions with an even balance of Democrats during his term which kept an even balance in the government. Granted somethings were hard to get accomplished because of the differences, but it kept it balanced, in my opinion. It may not be “the monster ticket” as I put it, but possibly the only way to win on the Independent Ticket, and the only way to keep Hiltery and her deviant, coke-snorting/smuggling husband out of the White House. Not sure if McCain could beat her with Ron Paul running Independent and taking Republican votes. Im kinda new to this politics thing and have been doing as much research as possible, so bear with me.

    Comment by Jason — February 8, 2008 @ 12:44 pm
  66. Jason,

    Face it.

    Kucinich is a loon. Putting him on the ticket with Ron Paul would just make Ron Paul look like a loon.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 8, 2008 @ 12:46 pm
  67. Well Bradley,
    Fiction can be fun, but here in reality there’s only one hope right now for the restoration of our Democratic Republic, and that’s Dr. Paul. Your choice of words like “steal” and “infiltrated” are sophomoric at best in your feeble attempt to discredit Congressman Paul’s presidential run. We The People will fight, tooth and nail toward our unequivocal goal of aceding to true American Liberty, Sovereignty and Peace under President Paul. This site should be a beckon of liberty, not a platform for amateurs to spew nonsense that’s laughable at best.

    Comment by Crazy Horse — February 8, 2008 @ 12:52 pm
  68. The war is the only thing preventing many thoughtful American conservatives (including Rush Limbaugh, I believe) from supporting Ron Paul. Dr. Paul has had a difficult time convincing people that we should have never invaded Iraq in the first place and that we shouldn’t be there anymore.
    With all his talk about blowback, non-intervention, and just wars, he’s failed to communicate effectively to security-conscious voters who want to feel safe. Nevermind whether they truly are safe or not, as long as the war makes them FEEL safe, they’re for it. They think Dr. Paul’s message of freedom is all well and good, BUT, we have to fight the terrorists on their turf to keep them away from ours. John McCain is willing to “Follow Osama to the gates of Hell” though he should first consider following Osama to Pakistan. So these security conscious conservatives think that the way to be safe is to attack Saudi terrorists in their home turf, Iraq, will keep them out of the US. This logic does not work. “Terrorists will attack US soldiers in Iraq instead of innocent civilians in the US,” is their argument. I think the terrorists are aware that the American public is much more willing to accept the death of a soldier than a civillian.
    I think that whether or not we are in Iraq, terrorists will plot to kill American civilians living in America. I don’t believe the war shifts their target to American soldiers on the ground in Iraq. This is evidenced by the many terrorist plots subsequent to 9/11 that have been foiled by good old-fashioned detective work performed by traditional domestic intelligence and law enforcement groups working together. If anything, the war has made the work of these good people in uniform more difficult by virtue of the fact that there are probably now more terrorists who are plotting to harm Americans in America than there would have been if we had never invaded Iraq. If the war is keeping terrorist preoccupied in the Middle East, why are there so many “plots” being uncovered? Why are we building a border wall? The war has done nothing but increase the ill-will toward the US. Ron Paul understands this. Ron Paul is a truth-seeker. Ron Paul does not try to fit the world into a little box. He strives to understand. That is the difference between him and the other candidates.

    Comment by vic — February 8, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
  69. UC, tell you what, I’ll put this guy’s credibility and credentials up against yours any day of the week.
    Obviously you think there is no such thing as a conspiracy because they don’t have ‘links.’

    This is the author of my link. Please post your credentials so we can get a look at them and judge who is more credible for ourselves.

    Dr. Jack Wheeler
    Architect of the Reagan Doctrine

    The debt which America and the entire world owes Dr. Jack Wheeler is virtually immeasurable: as architect of the Reagan Doctrine, he is one of the handful of men most responsible for the defeat of the Soviet Empire in the 1980s. He served his country as an “unofficial” liaison between the Reagan White House and anti-Soviet insurgents, pro-democracy activists and freedom fighters around the world, in Nicaragua, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Laos, Afghanistan, throughout Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union itself. With a Ph.D. in Philosophy, he is a former lecturer in Aristotelian ethics at the University of Southern California, author of several books, and is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records for the first free fall sky-dive in history at the North Pole. From becoming the youngest Eagle Scout in history, to climbing the Matterhorn at 14, to swimming the Hellespont and living with Amazon headhunters at 16, to having once defeated Vladimir Putin — and his KGB bodyguard! — in arm wrestling, Jack Wheeler has lived an amazing life, as noted by the Wall Street Journal when it called him “the real Indiana Jones” (around the same time, the Soviet press called him “an ideological gangster”). As owner of Jack Wheeler Expeditions he continues to lead three to five expeditions a year; and when he isn’t retracing Hannibal’s route over the Alps with elephants or discovering unknown tribes in Africa and New Guinea, as President of the Freedom Research Foundation he provides senior government leaders with crucial information on political and economic freedom, and he remains a key consultant to numerous international corporations regarding geopolitical strategy. His writings are online at ToThePointNews.com.

    Comment by John Newman — February 8, 2008 @ 1:16 pm
  70. KUTGW,

    Go back and surf through the old comment threads here on Ron Paul…you’ll see a pronounced pattern of racism and xenophobia, as well as arguments against free trade and immigrants who “come here for our welfare”.

    You’re an immigrant who supports Ron Paul, kudos to you…most of the people we’ve labelled Paulestinians would never have allowed you to cross the border if they’d had their way. I personally think that everyone should have the opportunity to come here and work.

    Ron Paul has stated many times that he finds the idea of a border fence offensive. He just doesn’t believe illegal immigrants are entitled to government entitlements

    Then why isn’t he talking about removing the welfare state? He’s using the welfare state as a rationalization for his bad immigration policy…so if he’s economically-minded he should recognize that immigration is economically good and welfare is economically bad, so why is he choosing to spare the bad program by infringing on an economically beneficial activity? A rational person would ask why Paul overall gives so little time to discussing removing the welfare state but so much time to “securing our borders”, but then a lot of Paul’s supporters don’t seem willing to question philosophical inconsistencies like that.

    Paultards hate foreigners. Not sure where you come to this conclusion.

    Listening to multiple Paul supporters give economically ignorant or incorrect reasons to continue restricted immigration before finally exposing their actual reasoning by moving onto arguments about “culture”. Once they start talking about the government’s responsibility to stop our “culture” from being destroyed by immigrants it becomes quite clear they never gave a damn about the economics.

    Does opposing military intervention in other nations equate to hating the foreigners? Because we would rather not bomb other countries and not mess with the internal affairs of other nations because we disagree with their way of life?

    Foreign policy is an area where I generally agree with Ron Paul and his more sane supporters. Right up until I get to the Lew Rockwell crowd who are isolationists, not non-interventionists. There are times where warfare will be necessary. There are times where pre-emptive warfare may be necessary (and no, Iraq was not one of those times). There are times when military intervention is required outside of our borders. The Paul supporters I have problems with, however, are the isolationists who assume that no intervention could possibly be just. And frankly, that’s just naive. To your credit, you don’t appear to be one of those supporters. Nor do I think Ron Paul is an isolationist.

    Paultards want to “punish” the mainstream press for ignoring Ron Paul. Here we go again with another complete fiction. The only “punishment” I’ve heard of is voting with our wallets by tuning out and not paying for biased media outlets that ignore Ron Paul in their coverage of the election. Is that wrong in your simple world view too?

    Nope, I’ve got no problem with that approach to dealing with your discontent, as long as you’re doing so with the understanding that the “MSM” is under no absolutely no obligation to provide coverage to Ron Paul or any other candidate if they don’t so choose. Is that what you’re saying?

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
  71. I will NOT support “Songbird” McCain.

    Ron Paul all the way!

    Comment by ang — February 8, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
  72. Unfortunately it took segregationist Governor Wallace to reveal the truth that “there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between” Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, detaining protesters, banning books like “America Deceived’ from Amazon, stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly. They are both guilty of treason.
    Support Dr. Ron Paul and save this great nation.
    Last link (before Google Books bends to gov’t Will and drops the title):
    http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

    Comment by Dave — February 8, 2008 @ 1:30 pm
  73. This is pretty far fetched but as a Ron Paul supporter, I think in the interest of fairness in light of the way the Republican Party and the MSM have treated Dr. Paul’s candidacy, I think it would be wonderful if all good men and women who are chosen to be party delegates should be free to make amends by casting their votes for Dr. Paul, the only candidate that will insure the survival of America as an independent nation. In fact, if they truly love their country, all delegates would do so. Ignorance when voting is no excuse!

    Comment by Owen — February 8, 2008 @ 1:37 pm
  74. The point to all this is the fact we must go on. We the people must participate in the progress of letting the elite know that there are enough of us who are sick and tired of politics as usual. Who cares if Ron Paul can’t win? Certainly, we all suspected this from the beginning of the race! But, most of us donated to send a message! At least that’s why i supported Dr Paul. And, is why i will continue to believe that someday, somehow, our message will reach enough people to actually make real changes in this country. GO RON PAUL!

    Comment by kenastan — February 8, 2008 @ 1:47 pm
  75. All the RP supporters have put it so well, what more could I add?

    Maybe….then there were three?

    Take the Red pill and wake up! :-)

    Comment by brian — February 8, 2008 @ 1:54 pm
  76. Like I said, Crawtard (as long as you persist in calling RP supporters Paultards it’s only fair), I don’t speak for the Paultards that you have encountered and I don’t see why they should have any reflection on Ron Paul at all. Every candidate’s support base includes people who’s views are undesirable to you or I.

    For example, there are McCain supporters that hate Muslims as a result of McCain saying “bomb, bomb, bomb… bomb, bomb Iran”. Does the fact that McCain has racist supporters make McCain a racist? Or just psychotic?

    There are Obama supporters that hate white people and listen to hip hop that promotes killing whitey and killing cops but that doesn’t make Obama a racist or a cop killer.

    There are no doubt a bunch of Communists that love Hillary Clinton. Does that make her a Communist (well in her case, yeah, it probably does).

    It’s ridiculous to equate the views of Ron Paul’s supporters with the views of Ron Paul.

    BTW – Ron Paul has been talking about removing the welfare state. It’s one of his core principles. If you want to learn more about him I suggest you read one of his books like “Pillars of Prosperity: Free Markets, Honest Money, Private Property” or “A Foreign Policy of Freedom” rather than judging Ron Paul by the comments of a handful of his supporters.

    So, in your infinite wisdom, who do you believe we should be voting for?

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 1:55 pm
  77. BTW Crawtard – If you look at the index to RP’s book “Pillars of Prosperity”:

    http://www.mises.org/store/Pillars-of-Prosperity-P466C0.aspx?AFID=1

    You’ll clearly see the chapter entitled:

    Oppose the Federal Welfare State

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 1:59 pm
  78. John,

    Obviously you think there is no such thing as a conspiracy because they don’t have ‘links.’

    Actually it’s really because they don’t have “proof”. Hyperlinks taking you to authoritative documents that can be studied and analyzed objectively represents proof. Making accusations againt McCain based on nothing more than the personal opinion of a guy with a keyboard. There is no proof that McCain had relations with prostitutes beyond the unsubstantiated accusations of the guy you linked to and as such your comment is a dishonest argument.

    And concerning your cited author, what position exactly did he hold in the Reagan administration? I’ve never heard of the fucking guy and his bio at his site offered absolutely no evidence that he had anything to do with the Reagan administration beyond a bunch of quotes that appear to have been fabricated.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
  79. UC, and your credentials are…

    Comment by John Newman — February 8, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
  80. As I see it we can only assume, consider and plan but in the end we must do all things which honor our nation and to run a pro liberty agenda.

    I agree a stealth mode would appear to the masses as dishonest. But I can tell you I had no idea how dishonest the GOP has been until I began to support Paul.

    Let’s face it the GOP and Donkey party may have always been this corrupt becuase many of us who support Paul have never votied in primaries, watched every debate. It also appears to me that both parties would prefer the population to be ill informed to the party hacks can imply and report the good things they have done.

    But I remember when the Head of the GOP wanted to bar Paul from “ALL FUTURE DEBATES” for offering the message of limited gov. it’s funny because the other day I found a youtube of a “W” tv add which promised limited gov, balanced budget and a limited policy to policy the world so Paul is correct when he states “W” offered this same plan prior to his first term.

    Let’s look at the facts we are down to 3 men in the race. The MSM tried to sell the nation that Fred was the second coming and that for sure Rudy and Mitt were electable… What happned with that lie?

    I suggest Ron Paul run as an “I” and forget the party issues. The GOP sure has rewarded Paul with equal time, support and amazing success haven’t they? NOT!

    I noticed in sections of states where we has district leaders paul came in 1,2,3 and that was with a stacked ticket with Paul, McCain, Huckabee, Thomspon, Mitt, Rudy. So we can beat the MSM if we just get out and do the work.

    In regards to my local GOP. We have in fact taken over the local gop and it looks like I will become chairman of our local district. Thats a huge step the local gop has not played fair either they mentioned the next meeting times and dates and when all paul supporters arrived they were ending the meeting. So they conspired to change the meeting and did so without notice to the population except for the same old party hacks. We saw then commit a dishonest act even before we vote for chair in the coming weeks.

    In my view we either need to take the party back and claim is for what it use to be or we need to wash our hands and become an indpendant and I thin k that’s what a lot of american’s prefer with such low poll ratings for both parties.

    Comment by Darel — February 8, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
  81. I’m going to write in Ron Paul regardless of all other outcomes, because there is not another candidate who is worth my vote.

    None of them are willing to scale the military back to being a national defense.
    None of them will reinstate the abused rights stifled by George W.
    None will work on our looming currency problem.

    I just don’t think that most people even understand that we all work til at least March to fund our government. Do you think we’re getting a good return on our investment?
    Don’t start with the comparisons of our standard of living to that of Cambodia. I’m talking about losing the things that make me proud of America. We were a great open culture, leaders in innovation borne of our freedom. We are now open to putting torture and nuclear pre-emptive war on the table?? What is happening to my country?

    A great deal of power truly does reside in the hands of a very few in our modern reality. Regardless of the sharing arrangements of the power, it is too much. We The People must at least actively try to take it back.

    At least doing so makes me feel better.

    Comment by FFortner — February 8, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
  82. KUTGW,

    I don’t speak for the Paultards that you have encountered and I don’t see why they should have any reflection on Ron Paul at all

    Never said you did. I’ve met several Paul supporters I like and respect and they’re certainly not reflective of the people I’ve got problems with either. The problem I’ve got with Paulestinians is that they’re followers of the cult of personality of Ron Paul and aren’t following him out of any sort of coherent political ideology. BTW, “PaulTards” is somebody else’s nickname for the people I call Paulestinians…I generally don’t use it and only cited it in a response to your usage of it.

    For example, there are McCain supporters that hate Muslims as a result of McCain saying “bomb, bomb, bomb… bomb, bomb Iran”. Does the fact that McCain has racist supporters make McCain a racist?

    If McCain had put out race-baiting newsletters as Ron Paul did, then offered an evasive response as to who was responsible for them, I’d certainly consider the possibility that he was a race-baiter (if not a racist). As it is, I don’t particularly care for McCain or his more devoted supporters either.

    There are Obama supporters that hate white people and listen to hip hop that promotes killing whitey and killing cops but that doesn’t make Obama a racist or a cop killer.

    Never claimed that he was. If he’d published a newsletter advocating the stomping of whitey, though, I’d probably consider that he was.

    There are no doubt a bunch of Communists that love Hillary Clinton. Does that make her a Communist

    Yeah, pretty much…but only because that’s what she advocates for policy :)

    It’s ridiculous to equate the views of Ron Paul’s supporters with the views of Ron Paul.

    Not entirely…when a candidate caters to people like Alex Jones it’s reasonable to ask why and what views they might have in common. But I myself don’t consider Paul to be a racist or a “truther”…a race-baiter in the past, perhaps, a terrible judge of character and competence definitely, a horrible presidential candidate certainly, but he’s probably a decent guy, he’s got some good ideas and he probably means most of what he says. I just don’t trust him to implement those ideas or to appoint good people to positions in his Cabinet.

    So, in your infinite wisdom, who do you believe we should be voting for?

    Whoever you think best represents your views and will do a good job of implementing them. For me that’s “none of the above”. I don’t consider any of the candidates in this race to be worth a vote so I won’t be casting one for any of them.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
  83. John,

    UC, and your credentials are…

    On my bio. And Jack Wheeler’s are where? What position did he hold in Reagan’s cabinet that makes him the “architect” of the Reagan Doctrine? Because everything I’ve read about the man indicates he created his own doctrine.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 2:23 pm
  84. Brad Warbiany,

    Lincoln went into the 1860 convention with 22 delegates and won the GOP nomination. According to your description, Lincoln is a thief that “stole” the nomination. History tells me that he became the 16th POTUS. If anybody has a history of deception, it’s McAmmnesty. The GOP rewards sharp intelligence, not crooked politicians.

    Ron Paul will be President!

    Comment by TTexas — February 8, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
  85. John,

    You can save any time looking up Wheeler’s resume…I think I’ve answered my own question. It appears the architect of the Reagan Doctrine was actually Michael Johns, not Jack Wheeler. The only person claiming that Jack Wheeler had anything to do with constructing or having any input at all into the Reagan Doctrine is apparently Jack Wheeler, who as far as I’ve been able to tell never worked for Ronald Reagan in any capacity whatsoever except as a member of the Reagan Youth in California in the 1960s. He’s a fraud.

    Nice link there, John.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
  86. Ron Paul has been invited to run for POTUS on the Constitution Party ticket. Given that the LP pretty much blackballed Ron Paul, don’t look for him to run Libertarian anytime soon. But a third-party run, backed by some of the multi-millionaires that operate the CP, could very well do the trick.

    Comment by Dave — February 8, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
  87. When did the LP “blackball” Ron Paul ?

    You are aware, aren’t you, that they have basically invited him to run as a Libertarian in 2008:

    http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/12/09/libertarian-national-committee-invites-ron-paul-to-run-as-a-libertarian/

    And he turned them down:

    http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/12/10/ron-paul-turns-down-invitiation-to-run-on-libertarian-ticket/

    And, oh yeah, running on the Constitution Party ticket would just reinforce the impression that a lot of people have of Ron Paul, that he’s an amiable kook.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 8, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
  88. As creator of PaulCongress, I thank you for the web traffic. However, I must state I completely disagree with you on the Paul Campaign. Full Speed ahead, I say! …and beware of Trojans bearing gifts :)

    Comment by Tim — February 8, 2008 @ 2:50 pm
  89. Everyone just wait a minute!… WHEN this whole stimulus plan thing backfires mid June or July, McBush will drop out; out of intimidation. The GOP will be desperate for a man like Dr. Paul to pull us out! If not, I truly believe that with in the next 4 years we will see an end to the CURRENT US constitution, as well as our national sovereignty.

    RP is one of our last hopes!

    Comment by Dizor — February 8, 2008 @ 2:54 pm
  90. I agree it doesn’t look like Dr. Paul is going anywhere but I think since he’s got all that cash on hand he should stay in it till it runs out even if it means going 3rd party for a little while SPREAD THE MESSAGE!!! with only 3 left in the field they have to give him more time in the debates right? No Romney – McCain slugfest anymore

    Comment by Bill — February 8, 2008 @ 2:56 pm
  91. UC, I was sorry to read you have no more credentials or credibility than a one-eyed potato.
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=2F52746E-5A4C-41A1-B0C2-D91B3C8C769F

    http://www.infiltec.com/wmod696.htm

    Comment by John Newman — February 8, 2008 @ 2:57 pm
  92. Crawford,

    You’re always going to find supporters of the “cult of personality” ilk whenever you have a candidate that resonates with people. Obama and Hillary have based their entire campaigns on the cult of their personalities. The only reason Giuliani didn’t have a cult of personality is because there’s nothing to like about his personality. The mistake you make is that you think Ron Paul’s support is all about a “cult of personality” and weak idealism. Like I said, read some of RP’s books before you make that determination.

    It’s really all about the newsletters with you guys at LibertyPapers isn’t it? We’ve already discussed this over and over and as I’ve said before this is an issue of irrelevance in the grand scheme of things. Has Ron Paul ever made a racist comment or even a bigoted comment in his entire political life? No. Has Ron Paul ever pandered to a particular demographic for support? No, I don’t believe he has. This is a guy that lives and breathes the ideal of liberty and given no other evidence of racism in this man’s political career the newsletters issue is ridiculous.

    How you guys can prattle on about these newsletters when we have a candidate that has been fighting for decades against interventionist foreign policy that has killed hundreds of thousands of brown skinned people in the name of the endless-global-war-on-islamo-fascist-terrorism-jihadist-threat-to-America and a war on drugs that imprisons a huge portion of the black community is bizarre and when other candidates make openly racist statements in debates. I guess you’re happy to whine about the small sh!t in life while you lose your freedoms and the economy collapses around you.

    As for attacking Alex Jones, that’s easy because he does have some pretty outrageous views but he is one of the few government and establishment watchdogs we have – regardless of what you think of his final conclusions.

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 3:05 pm
  93. It would only equal out the imbalance the media has given Ron Paul. But wait, no laws would be broken. Yuk, Yuk, Yuk….

    Comment by eric — February 8, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
  94. KUTGW,

    You’re always going to find supporters of the “cult of personality” ilk whenever you have a candidate that resonates with people.

    Yes, but the problem is that they’re the dominant voice of the Ron Paul candidacy. That’s mainly because Ron Paul’s campaign staff has done a horrible job of getting their message out largely (I suspect) because Paul chose not to hire experienced professionals because of his distaste for “handlers”. As a result, the primary people you hear from on the campaign are the most extreme grassroots and they often hijack the message for ridiculous platforms. I don’t believe that Ron Paul’s one of them, but I also believe that’s what his base primarily is right now. That might have changed had the official campaign done a better job of taking control of their own message and focusing the grassroots, but unfortunately they didn’t so that’s kind of it. I originally planned to vote for Ron Paul myself, but frankly I just can’t see voting for someone who has assembled a campaign staff that’s done this bad of a job (most of the publicity came in spite of the official campaign, not because of it) because why should we assume that he’d run the executive branch any better.

    Obama and Hillary have based their entire campaigns on the cult of their personalities. The only reason Giuliani didn’t have a cult of personality is because there’s nothing to like about his personality.

    No argument from me on that.

    It’s really all about the newsletters with you guys at LibertyPapers isn’t it? We’ve already discussed this over and over and as I’ve said before this is an issue of irrelevance in the grand scheme of things.

    Yes and no…I knew about the newsletters before and I was okay with them because it was my understanding that Ron Paul hired someone who misrepresented his views to run that newsletter (it happens) and, as you say, they were old news. What I didn’t realize was that Ron Paul was still apparently employing that person as a key advisor to his campaign. That’s not ancient history, that goes directly to his ability to hire personnel who can accomplish his agenda and he demonstrated that he still can’t tell someone who is an asset from someone who isn’t. Those newsletters were race-baiting, the person who edited those newsletters realized that and refuses to accept responsibility for it (more than willing to throw Ron Paul under the bus, apparently) and yet Ron Paul still keeps this person around. That’s not the sign of a responsible leader who learns from his mistakes…that’s the sign of a man who doesn’t recognize a problem and fails to hold his people accountable. That was the final straw for me and that’s why my opinion of him did a 180. It actually had little to do with the Paulestinians (who I made fun of back when I supported Ron Paul).

    How you guys can prattle on about these newsletters when we have a candidate that has been fighting for decades against interventionist foreign policy that has killed hundreds of thousands of brown skinned people in the name of the endless-global-war-on-islamo-fascist-terrorism-jihadist-threat-to-America and a war on drugs that imprisons a huge portion of the black community is bizarre and when other candidates make openly racist statements in debates.

    He holds no leadership positions within the Republican party, he doesn’t live up to his own standards on earmarks, he hasn’t formed any coalitions of significance within the party, he’s viewed as a quaint anachronism by some and a fool by others. Does Ron Paul have the best platform in the race? Absolutely. But he’s never demonstrated in any capacity that he’s a leader who can get others to buy in…he’s a gadfly who hasn’t changed the course of his party at all. Considering that he’ll be facing a hostile Congress for the duration of his term, I’m sorry but I just see a Ron Paul presidency as a disaster, mainly because I don’t trust him to appoint a Cabinet that isn’t a) incompetent or b) corrupt and I don’t think he’s capable of working with people outside of his circle of friends. I don’t see him as a good negotiator with foreign diplomats, I don’t see him as an effective administrator, I don’t see him as someone who can push necessary bills through…I just see him as a guy who’ll make a lot of nice speeches while things crumble around him. And I can’t vote for that, even if I think the guy’s got some good ideas.

    As for attacking Alex Jones, that’s easy because he does have some pretty outrageous views but he is one of the few government and establishment watchdogs we have

    People who buy into 9/11 conspiracies aren’t watchdogs, they’re liars and fools. There are plenty of people willing to hold government accountable who don’t have to make up their reasons. Alex Jones hurts the cause of people who wish to keep government in check by spreading dishonest arguments.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 3:57 pm
  95. who ever wrote this is an ass! give up.. sorry bro.. not one Ron Paul supporter is going to throw what they believe on McCain.. F the party and the rest of the neo con and neo liberal scum in both parties

    Comment by mark — February 8, 2008 @ 3:57 pm
  96. until people realize and believe that our gov’t is criminal… there will never be change for the better…VOTE RON PAUL

    Comment by mark — February 8, 2008 @ 3:58 pm
  97. Ha Ha, the establishment is shaking and sending this “Journalist” trying to convince us that if Ron Paul wins the nomination it would be a crime!? Because the delegates who are representing their people’s interest, freedom and liberty vote for him!
    Come on, next…

    Congressman Dr. Ron Paul: http://www.ronpaul2008.com

    Comment by Jamy — February 8, 2008 @ 4:02 pm
  98. John,

    I saw those sites when I checked around. Absolutely zero evidence of any actual involvement with the Reagan administration beyond his own claims (which list no work history). No indication of employment with Reagan beyond his time in the Reagan Youth, no list of contacts who work with him, no indication that anyone in the Reagan administration even knows who this guy is. No evidence whatsoever that he had anything to do with building the Reagan Doctrine, which appears to be credit he’s stolen from someone else to embellish his rather empty political resume.

    http://michaeljohnsonfreedomandprosperity.blogspot.com/

    Your anti-McCain link is bullshit written by a fabricator. Next time don’t trot out a fraud’s unsubstantiated accusations to build your case, unless you like being ridiculed.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 4:09 pm
  99. (terribly delayed response thanks to a minor comcast outage, otherwise would’ve responded within the hour of posting… :grumbles:)

    Kucinich is not by any means libertarian, but he is a principled man who is also honest. The idea that they could run as an anti-war ticket isn’t laughable, but not practical either; it would just create too much of a racket concerning a bi-partisan ticket & inherent conflicting policies between the two.

    An endorsement, on the other hand, would work out, and it would be for the simple fact that both men respect each other, despite glaring differences in their political opinions & ideologies. I would rather have Kucinich in office than Obama or Clinton or Edwards; at least we would be able to work with and compromise with an honest representative. It’s a shame (but not surprising) that corporate interests decided Kucinich was a thorn and have decided to oust him in in his bid for his Congressional seat.

    If anyone else gets Kucinich mixed up as a Libertarian, please, go back and do your homework. You don’t have to be a Libertarian to be principled; but of course, you can be principled & wrong as well.

    As for the main topic, I still reserve judgement that alot can happen between now and june, as well as between now and novemember. I’m a little worried that an election might not even occur due to martial law (or some other surprise), but I like to be a cautious optimist as much as possible. At this point, I think many people get wrapped up in political posturing; so much so, that I don’t think a coherent analysis will be done until after the fact. Of course, not everyone is an amateur historian, so I suppose it’s pointless to say that. Also, not doing any analysis would be a bit silly so I suppose I’ll just take everything with a grain of salt.

    I still think people should stop being so pessimistic concerning the campaign, but should also stop being so damn optimistic about pie in the sky goals such as RP winning the presidency. If you followed a General in to battle, with him saying “We’re going to lose.”, would your morale be lower than it would if he said “We’re going to give it all!” ? I mean seriously, what if many people just said “fuck it” at various points in history (aside from possible points where this did actually occur)?

    RP’s supporters have shown what we (the general population of citizens) used to be about; we used to treat politics as an everyday part of our lives. Something that always demands our vigilance & attention; something that is not separate from ourselves, that is not just resigned to our elected “representatives” (who may or may not feel obligated to actually represent you). Something that should be taken seriously and not objectified by the media as they filter the daily political actions of this country to suite their own and the State’s needs. Even if you still paint the RP campaign in such black and white terms, they at least accomplished / are accomplishing that.

    It seems I posted this amid a heated debate, hope I didn’t interrupt the flow of thought :|.

    However, I did find it noteworthy that at CPAC (http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/02/08/blogging-cpac-ron-paul-on-presidential-steroids/), a Romney supporter was convinced to vote for Paul due to sounding more presidential:

    “…A Romney supporter I know told me that Paul’s speech convinced him to support Paul. “I may not agree with Paul on Iraq, but saving the Republican Party is more important than that single issue,” a pregnant Romney supporter said to me. “This nomination is about turning the Republican Party back to conservative values and Ron Paul is the last candidate standing who has any.”

    Possibly an aberration, but interesting nonetheless; I do somewhat agree that his style should change to a more presidential tone, and less of the “getting in as much information as possible in the small amount of time” he’s allowed on MSM debates.

    Comment by Nitroadict — February 8, 2008 @ 4:25 pm
  100. CRAWTARD…..Love it! Keep up the good work folks. UCRAWTARD thinks she owns this site and gets very worked up when challenged.

    Really, great stuff!

    Comment by Matt Kerbouchard — February 8, 2008 @ 4:34 pm
  101. Anyone who has a problem with Ron Paul winning via a brokered convention also has a problem with Lincoln getting the nomination in 1860. He did so with a mere 22 delegates. So who’s going to step up and say that Lincoln shouldn’t have won?

    The rules are the rules, as laid out by the GOP. Playing by the rules is not underhanded by any means.

    Comment by Scott — February 8, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
  102. Gloves off… GO!

    Join the “Tea Party!” Help retake the Republican party by tossing overboard John Amnesty McCain.

    http://www.gopteaparty.com/

    Comment by PrOxNo — February 8, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
  103. Everyone who believes in freedom must give up on the Libertarian Party and join the Republicans and their Liberty Caucus.

    The Libertarian Party is not going anywhere because the system is biased against 3rd parties.

    We will win only if a “Ron Paul Republican” is elected President in the future, and influencing the Republican Party from within is the only way to achieve that.

    Comment by Pablo Escobar — February 8, 2008 @ 5:18 pm
  104. UC, I guess Front Page Magazine did an extensive interview with him for the fun of it. Btw, when did they interview you?
    He also wasn’t the founder of
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Freedom_Research_Foundation
    He also was never part of a group that included Ollie North, Adolfo Calero, leader of Nicaraguan Contras, Abdurrahim Wardak, Afghan Mujahideen leader, or any of the others involved in Democratic International.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_International
    WHAT! Contras & Afghan rebel leaders together with Ollie North and Jack.
    I didn’t realize that every policy advisor to a president needed to be on the payroll or have a job at the White House.
    What position did Michael Johnson hold in the Reagan White House.
    I have to hand it to you [wink, wink. nod, nod]about that statement about bringing up unsubstantiated accusations against a presidential candidate. That was subtle, man.

    Comment by John Newman — February 8, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
  105. Scott,

    Under the rules established by the Republican National Committee the only way Ron Paul could get the nomination would be if his supporters broke the rules.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 8, 2008 @ 5:37 pm
  106. I thought the media was supposed to report the news? Since when did it become the medium for telling people what was in the future, and what they should do?

    People have been telling me Ron Paul didn’t have a chance since there were 11 candidates. I heard after the first debate, that Ron Paul was finished. I’ve been told time and time again that I was wasting my money, my time and my support.

    So uh, whats new in this article? Same old crap I’ve been here for almost a year now. I didn’t listen then, I’m not listening now, and I will support Ron Paul even if he isn’t running.

    I maxed out my donations, but I already have the money saved up for when the general election donations are allowed, so that I can send even more.

    Surrender is not an option.

    Comment by badmedia — February 8, 2008 @ 6:04 pm
  107. Yes, but the problem is that they’re the dominant voice of the Ron Paul candidacy. That’s mainly because Ron Paul’s campaign staff has done a horrible job of getting their message out largely (I suspect) because Paul chose not to hire experienced professionals because of his distaste for “handlers”.

    Well, that’s your opinion, maybe you’re right that Paul’s campaign staff have done a terrible job or maybe it’s simply a matter of media bias. I have my own opinion that’s based on my observations of the media but obviously I have not been able to observe the actions of the campaign staff. To me it seems obvious that on a free medium of exchange like the internet his message has spread like wildfire but among the population of those that rely on the very biased medium of the mainstream media hardly anybody knows him. Which tends to indicate that it can’t all be blamed on the failure of his campaign staff.

    What I didn’t realize was that Ron Paul was still apparently employing that person as a key advisor to his campaign. That’s not ancient history, that goes directly to his ability to hire personnel who can accomplish his agenda and he demonstrated that he still can’t tell someone who is an asset from someone who isn’t. Those newsletters were race-baiting, the person who edited those newsletters realized that and refuses to accept responsibility for it (more than willing to throw Ron Paul under the bus, apparently) and yet Ron Paul still keeps this person around.

    Still blowing the newsletters out of proportion when there are much bigger issues at stake.

    He holds no leadership positions within the Republican party, he hasn’t formed any coalitions of significance within the party,

    Oh, you mean he’s not a powerbroker that panders and pleases the lobbyists. Oh please!

    he doesn’t live up to his own standards on earmarks,

    A molehill that he has more than adequately justified IMO.

    he’s viewed as a quaint anachronism by some and a fool by others.

    By the same people that have been destroying this country for the last 8 years and more. The same proud folk from Washington that gave us the Iraq war, the Patriot act, the Military Commissions Act, the coming economic (debt) stimulus package etc etc… Yeah, I really value their opinion.

    Considering that he’ll be facing a hostile Congress for the duration of his term, I’m sorry but I just see a Ron Paul presidency as a disaster, mainly because I don’t trust him to appoint a Cabinet that isn’t a) incompetent or b) corrupt and I don’t think he’s capable of working with people outside of his circle of friends.

    Unjustified and sounds like a redundant fear when Washington is packed to the gills with incompetent and corrupt politicians and nepotism.

    I don’t see him as a good negotiator with foreign diplomats,

    Why? Because he doesn’t plan to use bombs as a negotiation tactic?

    I just see him as a guy who’ll make a lot of nice speeches while things crumble around him. And I can’t vote for that, even if I think the guy’s got some good ideas.

    Well, I guess we have fundamentally different views of the role of government. IMO Ron Paul is the only guy that understands the role of a president. If Dubya Bush was as ineffective as (you say) Ron Paul would be we would have avoided the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, avoided the immense growth in foreign debt, inflation and we’d probably have a much stronger currency as a result. We would have avoided atrocities like Iraq and waterboarding and all of the ills that the Bush administration has given us. Yes, Ron Paul goes against the grain but does that make him wrong? Hell no!

    Keep holding out for that perfect candidate Crawford. By your standards I doubt anybody is electable (except for your noble self of course).

    People who buy into 9/11 conspiracies aren’t watchdogs, they’re liars and fools. There are plenty of people willing to hold government accountable who don’t have to make up their reasons. Alex Jones hurts the cause of people who wish to keep government in check by spreading dishonest arguments.

    Of course he is a watchdog regardless of what he believes about 9/11. Until there is an in depth investigation of 9/11 that answers the many open questions there is bound to be alternate theories of what happened that day – ranging from the official to the outrageous.

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 6:08 pm
  108. John,

    I guess Front Page Magazine did an extensive interview with him for the fun of it.

    Hardly the first time a publication’s done a story on a subject that later turned out to be bogus:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Cooke

    He also was never part of a group that included Ollie North, Adolfo Calero, leader of Nicaraguan Contras, Abdurrahim Wardak, Afghan Mujahideen leader, or any of the others involved in Democratic International.

    Actually he founded that group…with Jack Abramoff which lends credence to my assertion he’s a fraud. The roster of names you trotted out is a veritable who’s who of bullshit artists and con men, none of whom did anything of importance, except Ollie North who’s a convicted liar who was fired by Reagan and Wardak, who was a minor figure in the Afghan-Soviet war and now holds the Afghan Defense Minister job because Karzai had to dump his predecessor and needed somebody who wasn’t going to piss anyone off. Hey, I met Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen once when I was stationed in Kuwait in 1998…I guess I can claim credit now for being the “architect” of Operation Desert Fox.

    I didn’t realize that every policy advisor to a president needed to be on the payroll or have a job at the White House.

    People who claim to be the “architect” of a major foreign policy platform need to have more to back up their claims than their word and their involvement with a bunch of shady D-list politicos who didn’t have a hand in drafting policy. Especially when someone else has been credited with authoring the Reagan Doctrine:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Doctrine

    What position did Michael Johnson hold in the Reagan White House.

    Michael Johns, dipshit. Here’s his bio:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Johns

    I have to hand it to you [wink, wink. nod, nod]about that statement about bringing up unsubstantiated accusations against a presidential candidate. That was subtle, man.

    I have no clue what you’re talking about…probably more gibberish about accusations I never made about Ron Paul. And it’s “nudge, nudge, wink, wink”. If you’re going to throw out a Monty Python reference at least try not to fuck it up…it’s only four words long, how tough can that really be to remember?

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 6:23 pm
  109. KUTGW,

    To me it seems obvious that on a free medium of exchange like the internet his message has spread like wildfire but among the population of those that rely on the very biased medium of the mainstream media hardly anybody knows him. Which tends to indicate that it can’t all be blamed on the failure of his campaign staff.

    The spread on the Internet was largely a function of the grassroots, who usually operated independently of the Paul campaign (and who did quite a remarkable job, I’ll add). The official campaign is responsible for spreading the message among traditional media. They didn’t hold up their end. Part of that appears to be because they appointed a 24 year old kid who seems to have no experience in media or contacts with the press to run their press and communications and he did a terrible job. The Paul campaign didn’t hire professionals who knew how to run a presidential campaign, even when they had the means to, and that’s what got them killed in the publicity department. You can rail about the unfairness of that opinion if you want. I’m not trying to say this to be snide, but that’s just the way it is…you need to hire people who know what they’re doing if you want others to take you seriously. Ron Paul didn’t do that.

    Still blowing the newsletters out of proportion when there are much bigger issues at stake.

    It wasn’t the only problem I had with Ron Paul, it was the tipping point. I thought his immigration policy was a disgrace, I thought he was incapable of staying on topic in debates, I thought he was extremely weak on the specifics of “how” he planned to get all these ideas implemented, I thought he invested in issues that were unimportant or counter-productive to winning the race, and I thought he ran his campaign like an amateur. Once I realized that he was a horrible judge of character who didn’t hold his own people accountable for their indiscretions or poor performance that was it because those are critical things for a President to be able to do. I see him as the libertarian Jimmy Carter…well meaning but ineffective, and I realized I couldn’t support him.

    Oh, you mean he’s not a powerbroker that panders and pleases the lobbyists. Oh please!

    Because nobody respects him enough to put him in any positions of authority. Jeff Flake’s a libertarian-leaning deficit hawk who refuses to request earmarks and doesn’t pander to lobbyists and there’s a movement to get him onto Appropriations where he can do some good. Who’s pushing to move Ron Paul up?

    A molehill that he has more than adequately justified IMO.

    Flake doesn’t request earmarks for his people and he ran unopposed last time, so earmarks aren’t a concession a fiscally-sound politician needs to make. What’s Ron Paul’s excuse? Getting money back for his constituents? How do you think every other pork-loving politician justifies their earmarks?

    By the same people that have been destroying this country for the last 8 years and more. The same proud folk from Washington that gave us the Iraq war, the Patriot act, the Military Commissions Act, the coming economic (debt) stimulus package etc etc… Yeah, I really value their opinion.

    You should, because if Paul were elected he’d still have to work with them. As for the bills they passed, he wasn’t the only dissenting vote on any of them.

    Keep holding out for that perfect candidate Crawford. By your standards I doubt anybody is electable (except for your noble self of course).

    I’ll accept a candidate with a similar policy platform to Ron Paul’s who’s a better public speaker, who isn’t afraid to hire a real staff, and who doesn’t give evasive answers about his baggage. If that means that no candidate is good enough for me, so be it. I don’t accept the idea that I need to vote for someone I think unfit for office just to claim that I cast a ballot.

    Of course he is a watchdog regardless of what he believes about 9/11. Until there is an in depth investigation of 9/11 that answers the many open questions there is bound to be alternate theories of what happened that day – ranging from the official to the outrageous.

    You’ve been rational and relatively fair in your responses so I’m going to assume that you’re just trying to give the “truthers” a fair shake. I can respect that and it’s commendable, but they don’t deserve it because (and I mean this with all sincerity) the qualifications any “truther” are that they must be either a fool or a liar. Their position is speculative and their accusations are without any proof whatsoever (I’ve heard them all) so I respect nothing they have to say on that topic. If you yourself have questions about 9/11 I seriously suggest that you check out this site and if you have further questions try to discuss them with the site’s author. He’s a decent guy who despises Bush and who’s done a lot of actual research into what happened, which he extensively documents:

    http://www.debunking911.com/

    If Dubya Bush was as ineffective

    I don’t think I’ve argued that Bush was ineffective, but I have argued and do argue that he is incompetent. He’s gotten a lot of what he wanted accomplished…unfortunately for us it was all horrific policy because the man’s a fucking messianic idiot.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 6:57 pm
  110. WOW! Somebody didn’t get their nap today, UC.
    So, let me get this straight, you are making false accusations about the managing editor of Front Page Magazine, Jamie Glaznov, writing bogus stories? I’m not surprised, that is exactly par for the course for you and this website.
    And why am I not surprised that your ‘big gun’ is a toady for Big Pharma and his major role in the Reagan Doctrine was as an ‘advocate.’ Hell, half the frickin’ country was an advocate.
    Your need to divert from every point, every link, and fact I provided and to jump of a cliff into a hole of condescension and haughtiness fits you like a noose.
    Later, loser.

    Comment by John Newman — February 8, 2008 @ 7:11 pm
  111. What you don’t seem to understand is that there WOULDN’T be an upset if that scenario came true. Americans are dumb. Dumb as rocks. This is evident in the fact that they would even vote for anyone other than Ron Paul. Most Americans won’t care about something unless it threatens to take away their SUVs or get them off the couch.

    Comment by Shannon — February 8, 2008 @ 7:39 pm
  112. John,

    WOW! Somebody didn’t get their nap today, UC.

    Nope, what happened was you made a bullshit accusation about John McCain, you cited a bullshit source and I called you on it. If you don’t like how I responded to you, make honest arguments using reputable sources.

    So, let me get this straight, you are making false accusations about the managing editor of Front Page Magazine, Jamie Glaznov, writing bogus stories?

    I didn’t make any accusation about Front Page Magazine or their editor. I said that Jack Wheeler was a fraud and that the fact that a magazine interviewed him once doesn’t establish his credentials. Nice try with the straw man, though.

    And why am I not surprised that your ‘big gun’ is a toady for Big Pharma and his major role in the Reagan Doctrine was as an ‘advocate.’

    And yet he’s still not a fraud, unlike your source.

    Your need to divert from every point, every link, and fact I provided and to jump of a cliff into a hole of condescension and haughtiness fits you like a noose.

    Typical Paulestinian…you get called for spouting bullshit and you’re not man enough to admit you made a mistake. You just run away behind an ink cloud of gibberish. See you around…

    Comment by UCrawford — February 8, 2008 @ 9:18 pm
  113. With all this name calling it almost felt 9th grade again :\.

    It’s really hard to deny the traditional media ineptitude of the RP campaign (particularly the comment about the appointed 24 year old) .

    The grassroots have been on fire and it seems like it hasn’t been reciprocated enough by the actual campaign :\.

    Comment by Nitroadict — February 8, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
  114. The spread on the Internet was largely a function of the grassroots, who usually operated independently of the Paul campaign (and who did quite a remarkable job, I’ll add). The official campaign is responsible for spreading the message among traditional media. They didn’t hold up their end. Part of that appears to be because they appointed a 24 year old kid who seems to have no experience in media or contacts with the press to run their press and communications and he did a terrible job.

    As I said before, maybe you’re right but I don’t have any information on how the campaign was run so it’s pretty hard to make that kind of determination.

    Weak campaign management or not, that stats pretty clear show that the media has gone out of it’s way to ignore Ron Paul:

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=111851

    As for Jeff Flake, I don’t know anything about him. If he was running for president then maybe he would be worth considering. As he is not, it’s a little bit irrelevant. Regardless, we are talking about a minor issue and Paul’s justification was fine: “if the government is going to steal from the people, he might as well give a little back to his constituents”. Different philosophy, maybe slightly at odds with his ideals but hardly worth breaking into a sweat over.

    I’ll accept a candidate with a similar policy platform to Ron Paul’s who’s a better public speaker, who isn’t afraid to hire a real staff, and who doesn’t give evasive answers about his baggage. If that means that no candidate is good enough for me, so be it. I don’t accept the idea that I need to vote for someone I think unfit for office just to claim that I cast a ballot.

    That’s fine, wait for your knight in shining armor to come along. Just keep in mind that Ron Paul supporters may disagree with your harsh judgement of him for perfectly valid, well considered reasons – not because of a “cult of personality”. I really don’t buy the “cult of personality” idea anyway. You might be able to apply that concept to the Obama campaign but it would be more accurate to label Ron Paul’s campaign a “cult of ideas”. Every political movement or party is a “cult of ideas” so it’s really an irrelevant statement. Plus, I don’t think you are the final arbiter of whether those ideas are right or wrong.

    http://www.debunking911.com/

    Yes, I’ve read much of that site but I don’t think this is the final word and complete picture of what happened that day. Without going into all the many specifics (I’m tired and it’s late), there are many open questions that are not definitively answered by any official, truther or debunker.

    Comment by KeepUpTheGreatWork — February 8, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
  115. It’s amazing someone who runs a website with the title Liberty in it, could be so stupid.

    Comment by NH_GOP — February 8, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
  116. Dr. Paul asks John ‘big cheek’ McCain,”How do you define the term ‘natural born citizen of the United States of America’?”

    McCain ‘the Panamanian’ responds,”That term applies to anyone born of USA citizen parents (especially military parents), anywhere in the world (especially US controlled foreign lands).”

    Dr. Paul replies,”Even if they are descendants of Islamo-Fascists with a 100 year strategy?”

    Should be a great convention, I can’t wait! Viva la Revolucion!

    Comment by bbnet — February 9, 2008 @ 12:18 am
  117. To whoever wrote the drivel calling itself a news story: if Ron Paul won at a brokered convention, it wouldn’t be ‘theft’. First off, a simple definition of theft requires that something goes missing that rightfully belongs to another – and by definition, in a brokered convention the nomination belongs to no one.

    Furthermore, James A. Garfield won in a brokered convention without even being a candidate! And Lincoln came in with almost no delegates himself.

    Delegates, dependent on their state, are bound to a candidate for a number of votes. After that? All’s fair.

    That’s not theft, that’s politics.

    Comment by hickory — February 9, 2008 @ 12:58 am
  118. Hey buddy… clearly you have no sense of reality. you believe a thing is impossible because you cannot rationalize it, but impossible is nothing against persistence.

    let me cite two sources you should read and realize, mccain is atop a feeble tower with Dr. Paul prepared to clean up house

    http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/FRONTPAGE/801050301/1311/48HOURS
    http://www.greatamericanhistory.net/nomination.htm

    Hasta la victoria siempre!

    Comment by gobo — February 9, 2008 @ 1:04 am
  119. Quite frankly, with all the fraud in this primary election process, along with the power play shenanigans by the RNC and candidates, who can possibly say for certain that McCain, so despised, really received all those votes?

    We are certain that Dr. Paul did not receive all his votes, that much is certain. Perhaps he should now be in second place among the delegate getters. Many do not believe the outcomes of several of the states primaries.

    So it is possible that the “selected” presumptive nominee for the Republicans, is not really the nominee, or at least not by the amount of delegates he has vs. delegates he really should have.

    So if Ron Paul somehow did as you described, no one should complain. Dirty tricks and cheating have possibly gotten you McInsane and many Republicans will not vote for him. :)

    If Ron Paul usurps him, that is fine by me.

    Comment by Carole — February 9, 2008 @ 1:27 am
  120. Since when have Republicans ever been outraged enough by anything a fellow Republican did to not vote for him?

    If that were really the case, and if, suddenly, Republicans stood up for “America’s sense of fairness and decency”, then Ron Paul wouldn’t be running for president in the first place!

    Desperate times call for desperate measures. Maybe if the Republican Party has actually made a priority out of intellectual integrity – and not merely the purusit of power – then they wouldn’t be in a situation to have their presidential nomination “stolen” by an “underhanded libertarian”.

    Comment by Grant Williams — February 9, 2008 @ 1:31 am
  121. If John McCain gets the nomination, then the Republicans deserve to lose the election.

    McCain is just as dangerous to liberty as Clinton and Obama are; just in different ways.

    “Liberty” has a specific definition. It’s not an either-or between personal liberty and economic liberty; it’s both. Once you compromise one, it’s just a matter of time before you compromise the other.

    Comment by Grant Williams — February 9, 2008 @ 1:41 am
  122. [...] that answers that question as well as this one.   [...]

    Pingback by Below The Beltway » Blog Archive » Ron Paul: There Will Be No Third Party Run — February 9, 2008 @ 4:13 am
  123. [...] Grant Williams: If John McCain gets the nomination, then the Republicans deserve to lose the election. McCain is just… [...]

    Pingback by The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » Ron Paul: There Will Be No Third Party Run — February 9, 2008 @ 4:14 am
  124. Those wanting to resort to infiltration are free to do so.
    Those wanting to turn the bankers fiat money against those chosen by the establishment can take the pledge to use their economic stimulus rebate to support Ron Paul’s campaign or to buy silver or gold.
    Those wanting to expose the New York Times fraud against all who want to get our soldiers home from Iraq will find how it is being done here: http://www.nolanchart.com/article2461.html and can even send a polite email to Arthur Sulzberger Jr., it’s Chairman & Publisher

    Comment by Jim — February 9, 2008 @ 4:37 am
  125. I’ve been poking jabs at McCain for weeks now like this latest.
    To:Mr.R.Brown
    rbrown@mccain08hq.comrbrown@mccain08hq.com

    Can you please answer a few questions for me please?
    How can McCain hold the office of President even though he was not born in the states?

    Why is McCain looking to alienate Russia?

    Why does McCain want to spend 100 years in Iraq?

    Why does McCain think it funny to sing ‘bomb bomb bomb..bomb bomb Iran?

    Why does McCain target an entire country as an enemy, when it was a few extremist?

    Why does McCain support ILLEGALS? And does he know the definition of the word ILLEGAL?

    How does McCain plan on using his war background, as a way to save this country?(hes brought it up enough)

    Every time Ron Paul brought up the Constitution, McCain started laughing. Does McCain find the Constitution funny?

    Why did McCain have a woman thrown out of a town hall meeting because she ask him to answer a question about immigration and illegals?

    Can you tell me why McCain refuses to release information requested by Vets and POW’s?

    Can you tell me why in Vietnam McCain was called Songbird?

    Can you tell me why McCain was really hurt when he jumped from a plane and is telling people he was tortured by the enemy? The same enemy he was making propaganda recordings for?

    Can you tell me why on Gods green earth you are helping a man get elected with a track record like McCains?

    I support FREEDOM…I support the CONSTITUTION..I support LIBERTY
    c/c sent to every Ron Paul group I belong too.

    Comment by Lindsay — February 9, 2008 @ 5:16 am
  126. McCain= more of the same.
    = draft
    = more loss of liberties
    = more ati-American feelings in the world
    = war

    Ron Paul= return to personal liberties
    = USA being respected again worldwide
    = peace
    = prosperity
    = SOUND MONEY and better economy
    = stable families
    =hope
    =living by the GOLDEN RULE

    I vote for Ron Paul

    Comment by evangeline — February 9, 2008 @ 5:45 am
  127. I wish someone in the news would have the COURAGE AND INTEGRITY to cover what is really effecting the country and that is voter fraud, RIGGED Diebold machines, corrupted elections and a bought and disgracefully biased MEDIA. Those are the stories worth covering.

    Comment by Angie — February 9, 2008 @ 5:49 am
  128. This is less about stealing anything, then it is about people becoming involved. As you quoted Kevin from Houston as saying:
    “Some of these counties (like mine) don’t have *any* functional GOP organization. It is wide open to the first yahoo that says he wants to do the work (like me.)”

    Our apathy as a nation is coming back to haunt us. Since we haven’t been watching our politicians they have been stealing from us. It’s time for ‘we the people’ to actually mean something.

    http://www.downsizedc.org

    Comment by TimM — February 9, 2008 @ 6:25 am
  129. KUTGW,

    That’s fine, wait for your knight in shining armor to come along.

    It’s not really a “knight in shining armor” I’m waiting for because I’m not in need of saving by any of them…mainly because I don’t believe that freedom derives from government action. I don’t expect any politician to ride in and save the day because at the end of the day, they’re still politicians and the overwhelming majority of them are interested in power. That’s usually incompatible with pushing individual freedom.

    As for Jeff Flake, I don’t know anything about him. If he was running for president then maybe he would be worth considering.

    Any politician interested in reducing the size of government and the scope of its power is worth considering, whether they’re running for president or not. Whether it’s a “cult of personality” or a “cult of ideas” you’re still talking about a cult and it’s a bad idea to get your information on what works from just one source…that’s how tyranny starts. Here’s some info about Flake:

    http://flake.house.gov/Issues/

    I don’t consider him the savior of the country either, just a guy who seems to have some good ideas and who’s trying to seriously do something meaningful about them. It’s on a smaller level, of course, but lasting change usually comes from the bottom-up not the top-down and it requires patience. And I’m sure there are other candidates for office out there who are similar…you just have to pay attention and look for them and do what you can to help them if they’re from your district.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 9, 2008 @ 8:04 am
  130. KUTGW,

    I really don’t buy the “cult of personality” idea anyway.

    No, it appears that you don’t and I apologize for initially lumping you in with them. You’ve offered a fair and honest dialogue and I can respect that. I think you’ll find, however, that a great many of the rabid Paul supporters who pop up on these threads (and there are a lot) are very much personality cultists and most of them aren’t really able to objectively discuss his ideas. There are some, of course, but they appear to become fewer and fewer as the campaign’s gone on.

    Comment by UCrawford — February 9, 2008 @ 8:11 am
  131. The Republican party will realize that John McCain has no chance at winning the general election. What are the other choices?

    Comment by Treber — February 9, 2008 @ 12:17 pm
  132. imo, the following:

    1.) Furthering Self-Detonation

    2.) Supporting Hillary (I would say 1 & 2 at the same time)

    3.) Theocratee

    It’s abundantly clear that the establishment within the republican party ( I don’t say the entire as some regional GOP’s, such as maryland, are more receptive to RP supporters), do not want RP and will not bother to give him a fair shot (whatever that means, that phrase is a bit subjective when you’re talking about a political party. MSM on the other hand…)

    Comment by Nitroadict — February 9, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
  133. I come from a family of immigrants. I have married an immigrant, my son married an immigrant still, I will vote for Ron Paul even if I have to write him in.

    I like that he is against real ID, wants to end the war, wants to set our economy right, promotes individual freedom and liberties. I believe him.

    The media blackout of him just confirms that I need to vote for him. He must be a real threat to the elite, rich people who stand on the backs of the poor for them to be so afraid to give him equal time. The fact that he gets any coverage at all is really amazing to me.

    Most of my life I have been a person that could have said “I told you so”. I really don’t want to be driving around with a bumper sticker that says “Don’t blame me I voted for Ron Paul… I told you so”.

    The reason immigration limits are a good idea is because it cuts down on human trafficking which by another name is called slavery. The USA represents freedom to the outside world or, so, we are told this is why we are fighting the war in Iraq. It cuts down on actions like the Cuban invasion in the 60′s in Miami.

    Dr Paul is just a man. I can see the humbleness in his eyes and hear the earnest in his voice. We people who support him feel he is a very courageous man to stand up and use his voice and his presence to extend the message of freedom to the hypnotized masses.

    I think most of the people who are for Dr. Paul want this war to end and want their money to be worth something. I do not live in my mother’s basement.

    Comment by Working poor — February 9, 2008 @ 9:37 pm
  134. working poor

    That was beautifully said.
    Where can I get that bumper sticker?

    On a slightly optimistic note, Ron Paul has said he’ll hang in until the convention. I still think McCain’s run can end with either him saying somthing really stupid, or an illness. He’s so volatile, I suspect he’ll IMPLODE soon!

    The fat lady hasn’t sung yet!

    Comment by Angie — February 10, 2008 @ 5:52 am
  135. Angie,

    The fat lady hasn’t sung yet, but she’s in the wings warming up and the orchestra’s already started the overture.

    It’s time to stop with these ridiculous fantasies of a brokered convention. It’s not going to happen.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — February 10, 2008 @ 5:56 am
  136. Doug,

    However there is something to be said for hanging in there as long as you can. Last summer, pretty much everyone had written off McCain as being too broke to make it to Super Tuesday. His success has much to do with his ability to outlast the other front-runners as they screwed up their campaigns.

    Now, of course, if McCain should do something really dumb, and his campaign implodes as a result, we would see Romney unsuspend his campaign and be the favored guy to get the nomination rather than everyone turning to Paul to save them.

    But, there is no harm in hanging in there: if Ron Paul gives up now, he definitely doesn’t get the nomination. If he hangs in there, he almost definitely doesn’t get the nomination. Thus, there is no downside and a slight chance of an upside to hanging in there.

    Of course, he has no chance in winning the presidency; the newletters ensure that a majority of Americans would never cast a vote for him. But who knows, people have done quite well using a strategy of doing whatever it took to postpone defeat a little longer.

    Comment by tarran — February 10, 2008 @ 7:40 am
  137. It seems like MSM and other people think that if they say it enough times that we will be programed to believe that Ron Paul cannot win.

    Stranger things have happened than the underdog moving to the front. It has been my experience that anything is possible.

    Of course there are a lot of people who believe everything they hear on TV then there are also those who don’t believe anything they hear or see on TV.

    I would have never found out about Ron Paul if I was looking for TV to inform me of my choices. I am telling everyone I know about Ron Paul. The only one of the candidates who makes any sense to me is Ron Paul. End the war, stop paying taxes, restore the constitution, promote a sound economy I just don’t see how anyone could reasonably object to these policies.

    I think the Republican Party has lost a lot of credibility and ought to be ashamed of the way they have pushed out the only candidate running on the Republican ticket who actually adheres to what they supposedly stand for.

    Word of mouth is the best form of advertising.

    Comment by Working poor — February 10, 2008 @ 12:42 pm
  138. One thing I have learned in my life is that if you wake up and choose joy and work for what you believe, the world is a better place. I have been apathetic for politics for too long, Then came Ron Paul. He speaks the truth, and is STEADFAST, true to his convictions and genuinely CARES for the USA and the constitution, NOT HIS OWN SELF INTERESTS!!!! It is so refreshing. All I know is that he has rekindled so many people’s desires to make the USA great again. That also WAS/IS worth media coverage.

    Will he be elected? We’d all be better off if he is. But, since the MSM hasn’t been honest, fair or democratic in its coverage, we will all be strapped with national ID cards, a draft and 100 more years in Iraq. OH JOY (AND NOT THE TYPE I CHOOSE IN THE AM)

    Comment by Angie — February 10, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
  139. Another election trying to decide who is the lesser evil. We don’t have an excuse this time – We have been given a real candidate – one who holds our values and interests dear. Most were/are afraid of wasting their vote – As far as I am concerned any vote for other than Ron Paul is a wasted vote. The media picks our pres again – We deserve more of the same – Checked your pocket book lately??

    Comment by Ray — February 10, 2008 @ 7:08 pm
  140. RON PAUL = Peace, prosperity and freedom

    ALL the others= war, recession,draft, more of the same, national ID cards,

    NO CHOICE at all.

    Comment by Eva — February 11, 2008 @ 5:10 am
  141. oops i sent that last one before i was done.

    RonPaul2008.com

    Is the ONLY choice

    Comment by Eva — February 11, 2008 @ 5:12 am
  142. Ya know technology is so great we could have free, green energy now today even. The war is about control of the world’s energy. Wrap your heads around this: Energy belongs to us all. It should not be controled by power hungry governments willing to risk human life in order to keep this control.

    What about the people? Don’t they have rights to worship when and where they choose? To keep their local customs? To not have their water, piece of earth or air poisoned, or destroyed?

    So what if corporations and other governments can encroach upon these local populations of people to drill for oil, mine minerals , diamonds, and coal, and kill who ever they have to kill in whatever means they consider necessary because maintaining their control of these resources is #1.

    Why do people have to continue to die? That’s why I want a healer to lead this country cause I think a healer might be able to figure this out.

    Comment by Working poor — February 12, 2008 @ 8:38 am
  143. Ron Paul is todays voice crying out in the wilderness.

    If you want our country to end this war and fix our economy we have to stop electing presidents and other government officials who do not do our will.

    War is not healthy for children and other living things…

    Comment by Working poor — February 13, 2008 @ 3:57 am
  144. We must keep spreading Ron Paul’s message – everyday – to everyone we come in contact with.

    Comment by Ray — February 15, 2008 @ 6:28 am

Comments RSS

Subscribe without commenting

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by: WordPress • Template by: Eric • Banner #1, #3, #4 by Stephen Macklin • Banner #2 by Mark RaynerXML