Thursday Open Thread — What’s Left For Paul Supporters?

This blog has had a long and sordid history with the more ardent supporters of Ron Paul, as clearly evidenced in the comments to this post from yesterday.

Over the months leading up to the primaries and throughout the primaries, I’ve seen that those enthusiastic Paul supporters have often found it difficult to believe that Ron Paul’s support was as limited as some of the national polls indicated, largely because Ron Paul dominated straw polls, both online and offline. They came up with several reasons for this apparent lack of support:

1. Media bias — If the media doesn’t give Ron Paul any airtime, how could his support improve?
2. Polling bias — If polls don’t mention his name, or don’t call the “youth” without land-lines, or only registered Republicans, can they be trusted?
3. Diebold — Those pesky electronic voting machines are paid for by people who are anti-Paul
4. Election fraud — The system of neocons will silence those who speak truth to power
5. Illuminati/Bilderberger/etc — The people who really control everything won’t let him ascend

Inherent in these excuses is a consistent belief that Ron Paul is actually winning the hearts and minds (and thus the election), but that the system is so incredibly corrupt and fraudulent that he is being kept down by those above. With this, the following point is clear: the system is no longer to be trusted, and if Ron Paul does not become President, it is an indication that the system has been hijacked by people who will not allow it to be fixed.

What does this mean? It means that these Paul supporters, who have committed themselves to the rEVOLution, are up against a wall. They’re faced with a question:

“If the democratic process no longer works and has been subverted, what are you going to do about it?”

Those of us who don’t believe that Ron Paul is being denied his rightful place in the Oval Office by nefarious henchmen suggest that the next step is for those Paul supporters to join a wider liberty movement, and carry the torch that Ron Paul has ignited farther than he could ever do himself.

But for those who have placed their faith in the man himself, the fact that he’s been bested by statists like John McCain is a fact that cannot stand. There are only two options: agorism, or rebellion.

The choice is simple. The system is flawed, and must be destroyed. Agorism is the attempt to do so, through extricating oneself from the system and working to establish an alternate system in parallel. The end goal is that legitimacy in the establishment will fail, and at the same time the agorists will have created a viable alternative. The system thus withers away. Rebellion, of course, is much more clear: the taking up of arms against the established system. I would think, of course, that this is a ticket to either a penitentiary or a morgue. But for those who believe that the true support for Ron Paul greatly exceeds what appears in polls, such a rebellion would be too large to be quashed.

So the question still stands. For those truly adamant Ron Paul supporters who believe that he deserves to lead this country, and cannot accept the fact that he will not be President in November, what are you going to do about it?

  • Obvious Answer

    What’s left for Ron Paul Supporters? Run for office themselves. If you think the Ron Paul Candidacy is about Ron Paul you are sorely mistaken.

  • Linda

    Impeachment of Bush or Cheney on the grounds of the illegal Iraq War will discredit all the lords of war from both parties, thus leaving the path open for the peacemakers, including Ron Paul.

    The next step is to impeach….get onboard @

    Its about ending the “tyrant’s toolbox” created by Bush/Cheney.

  • Doug Mataconis


    Based on what happened with Clinton, the impeachment process will take a year.

    Bush and Cheney will be out of office in 320 days, why bother ?

    And, more importantly, how would a politically charged impeachment process that, if successful just results in the ascension of the incompetent and extremely statist Speaker of the House to the Presidency help the cause for liberty ?

  • El Capitan

    either way, I’m in. I would rather die fighting tyranny, than live under its rule. Peaceful or violent, it does’nt seem like they will allow a peacful movement, so far they have ignored the peaceful americans who want their country back. Maybe it IS time for us to show the established just what “We the people” are made of. Our founders would be ashamed of us for what we’re putting up with. Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, and our other fathers before us knew that there were some evils that just could not be reasoned with peacefully, therfore they had to take action, and its a good thing the French helped us out. Maybe if things get worse, which seems innevitable, there SHOULD be a rebellion. I know I would fight and die for my freedom, my country, my LIBERTY! would you?

  • Darel

    Between Doug Mataconis and Brad Warblany it would be hard to conclude that the Liberty Papers is truly about Liberty.

    I suppose liar Doug Mataconis and pessimist Brad Warblany just need to set back and watch and follow up on the Ron Paul rEVOLUTION a year from now.

    For starters I just won the local GOP Chair and Huckabee supporters, Mitt and Paul supporters all voted.

    Did you notice what happened in Alaska?

    By my count there are 28 on the east coast who are planning to run as Ron Paul Republicans.. I know of just over 19 who have filed and have started raising funds the rest are fence setters but are looking into it. I don’t know how many are planning the same idea who are from the Midwest or the West coast but someone who lives in CA has told me about 3 in his state alone and I visited there websites to confirm it.

    What else are we doing??? Well, just set back and watch of you are welcome to join us Brad…. So tell us Brad what are you doing to help Ron Paul?

  • Clay T

    It is a sad commentary on the dumbing down of America when the very concept of having someone in the Oval Office who wants only a Constitutional government is in the minority and even smeared as being crazy.

    What we are doing is continuing to advocate for Dr. Paul and 2 particular bills which he has introduced in Congress, that will make legal again for Americans to use Consitutional coinage, which once instituted will help bring an end to the runnaway inflation/stagflation that is now beginning to raise havoc with our consumer driven, oil based economy.

    Many are also considering the bold move of running for office on a Constitutional government platform. Having more members of Congress with the integrity and courage to vote with Dr. Paul, can, in time, bring back a balance. Today the incumbents in Congress have one thing on their minds…staying in power and voting in lockstep for whatever the Republicrat party leadership dictate.

    Also, I note for the record that Ron Paul is still on the ballot, still campaigning and there ready to step in, should anything happen to John McCain. History has a way of repeating itself, and I would not be surprised to see between now and the August convention, events come to light, or health issues arise that would trigger McCain’s withdrawal of his candidacy. Look at his age, the recently exposed nefarious behavior with the attractive female lobbist,and his wheeling and dealing on behalf of big doners. He is not very smart, so look for him to make some mistakes, look for his temper to turn to a public rage at some point, look for news of his steriod use, or human growth hormone. In short, look for the wannabee commander in chief to slip from grace and for Ron Paul to be on hand to pick up the flag.

  • Deeptoad

    I’ll be running for public office as a Libertarian.

  • John Peterson

    I was an Election Clerk in my precinct and I saw no problems with the voting process. I was there from 6:30 AM until after the precinct conventions. I voted for Ron Paul, but the majority of people in my precinct did not. They voted for McCain and then Huckabee. Democracy is built on the will of the people. We all think Ron Paul is the best, but unfortunately the American people as a whole do not. It is time to accept that and move on.

    I will direct my energy to helping build support for issues that matter to us all within the Republican party. Issues like fiscal conservatism and liberty. I hope you all will do the same. Ron Paul has been doing this for over 30-years. If he has the patience for it. So do I.


  • Doug Mataconis


    Democracy is built on the will of the people. We all think Ron Paul is the best, but unfortunately the American people as a whole do not. It is time to accept that and move on.

    Thank you, this is exactly what people need to realize.

  • Doug Mataconis


    Well, just set back and watch of you are welcome to join us Brad…. So tell us Brad what are you doing to help Ron Paul?

    Why do Brad, or I, or anyone else have to “help Ron Paul” ?

    This isn’t about one man, it’s about liberty.

  • jim

    I’ll vote Libertarian in the general. Thought about sitting it out, still might. Doesn’t send much of a message to just not vote. But a strong message could be sent if Ron or if some respected member of the so called revolution would come out and make an official endorsement of a third party candidate. That way the number for that party would reflect the will of the RP supporters.

    All of this is going to be rendered irrelevant though because I’m becoming increasingly convinced the world has already reached “Peak Oil”. In which case whomever is elected is going to be facing utter chaos in epic proportions before the end of their first term.

    have a nice day :)

  • Brad Warbiany


    As I pointed out in the post, I don’t believe that Ron Paul’s loss is a symptom that the entire process has been hijacked by the neocons or the bilderbergers, so my plan is to help take the movement that was built around Ron Paul and harness it to pro-liberty topics that are unrelated to Ron Paul getting into the White House.

    That said, I’m in favor of the “Ron Paul Republican” concept, just as I’m in favor of the “Republican Liberty Caucus”. Both are great ways to identify pro-freedom candidates, and the former is specifically a great way to capitalize on what Ron Paul has done.

    Darel, I would point out that you’re doing exactly what I would expect a sane Ron Paul supporter to do: picking up after his loss and moving on. Take a look at some of the other commenters to this post, though. Clay seems to think Ron Paul may still win (I’ll believe it when I see it), Linda seems to think impeaching Bush will do good (when it will probably just result in another statist Democrat reaping the benefits), and El Capitan is ready to take up arms (although that’s comforting to say from behind a keyboard, I doubt it’ll happen).

    As Doug points out, I don’t see that there’s any use in doing anything to “help” Ron Paul at this point. He won his Congressional primary, and he’s not going to be President. The key now is to use the positive aspects of his campaign, the way that a large grassroots following occurred around him, and turn that into a real change. The Ron Paul Republicans can help to do that; bitching about impeachment, continuing to believe he just might win, or armed rebellion won’t do that.

  • Mythic Mystic

    It’s never been about Paul, it’s always been the message! The thought that it’s all “Paul worship” is silly. Just because you support a guy who shares your goals does not mean that those who support him think he is the second coming. That rhetoric has been perpetuated by those who are not Paul supporters (i.e. calling supporters a “Cult”, ect..). The same thing happens with any candidate.
    Where do we go from here? Well since the “movement” has been around a lot longer than Ron Paul has been on YOUR lips (or finger tips), we will continue to try to have the rule of law enforced (i.e. the Constitution), and help America be the nation respected and loved again. Fantasy to some who have given up on America already but it’s something that must be done or the entire world falls.
    There is something ALL of the anti-Paul/anti-Constitution people need to realize, the movement picked up Paul NOT Paul created a movement. You are still stuck in a “top down” mentality that only those on high (“leaders”) can create a movement. That is why you have no idea why people support him and cannot understand the message.
    Most of us in this movement see how you are trying to goad us into some violent confrontation so we can finally be rounded up and put out of your misery. It’s not going to work, this is a peaceful revolution and it’s not a lighthearted endeavor.
    If you are ever placed in front of a jury of your peers (if we still have those), you should hope and pray that there are Ron Paul supporters on that Jury. Otherwise it WILL be guilty until proven innocent. Think about that one.

  • Valeria

    Democracy is built on the will of the people. We all think Ron Paul is the best, but unfortunately the American people as a whole do not. It is time to accept that and move on.

    “I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America; and to the REPUBLIC..”

    What part of we do not live in a democracy did you not understand? I hate when people say our democracy. Which school did you go to? If your going to be involved in our REPUBLIC at least know what you are talking about. I will NOT sit idly by and succumb to tyranny. I will die fighting before I live under that rule.

  • Valeria

    all think Ron Paul is the best, but unfortunately the American people as a whole do not. It is time to accept that and move on.

    “I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America; and to the REPUBLIC..”

    What part of we do not live in a democracy did you not understand? I hate when people say our democracy. Which school did you go to? If your going to be involved in our REPUBLIC at least know what you are talking about. I will NOT sit idly by and succumb to tyranny. I will die fighting before I live under that rule.

  • Brad Warbiany

    Mythic Mystic,

    It’s never been about Paul, it’s always been the message! The thought that it’s all “Paul worship” is silly.

    Unfortunately I don’t have time to look this up (maybe one of my co-bloggers might help me out here), but comments to posts at this blog and elsewhere have been left with sayings such as “Ron Paul is our last hope”, “Ron Paul is the only man who can put an end to x, y, z”. I tried to be clear in my post that this isn’t all Ron Paul supporters, only the most adamant.

    Most of us in this movement see how you are trying to goad us into some violent confrontation so we can finally be rounded up and put out of your misery.

    I am not trying to do so. I’m asking the Ron Paul supporters what is next? This question is also specifically leveled at the people who believe this is about Ron Paul and NOT about a wider movement. The statements they’ve made have backed them into a corner.

    I personally am a big fan of the agorism option (not related to Ron Paul specifically, but in general for our society). One of my goals in writing this blog is to do my part to erase the legitimacy of the system, because only if we convince the masses that the system is fraudulent and harmful to their ends can we change it.

  • El Capitan

    either way, I’m in. I would rather die fighting tyranny, than live under its rule. Peaceful or violent, it does’nt seem like they will allow a peacful movement, so far they have ignored the peaceful americans who want their country back. Maybe it IS time for us to show the established just what “We the people” are made of. Our founders would be ashamed of us for what we’re putting up with. Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, and our other fathers before us knew that there were some evils that just could not be reasoned with peacefully, therfore they had to take action, and its a good thing the French helped us out. Maybe if things get worse, which seems innevitable, there SHOULD be a rebellion. I know I would fight and die for my freedom, my country, my LIBERTY! would you? This is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!…but we’re losing it.

  • Mythic Mystic

    Most who support any “Candidate of choice” will always say their candidate is the only one that would put an end to or solve “x,y,z”. I find that whole argument mute and sort of backwards thinking. I hear Obama supporters, Clinton supporters, hard core McCainiacs saying the same thing (their candidate is the ONLY ONE that will solve x, y, z.) About Dr. Paul, he WAS the only one that promoted more liberty for all. That is not worship but an observation. Who else was against the war (regardless of which way you think on that), the IRS (actually has introduced legislation, however doomed, to abolish it), and against the distructuion of our constitution and civil liberties? All of these are observations and not “Paul-Worship”. I mean even if he wasn’t serious about those points, who else mentioned those things? Just observations.

    Those new to the movement of Liberty probably have don’t know what to do next since their “leader” hasn’t made it to POTUS, but those of us who have been in the liberty movement longer than Paul has been in congress knows this could be (and will be) a long (perhaps forever) struggle. We have made great strides in making people aware of what is going on in our nation and the world.

    The unfortuante thing is the “agorism” model has been performed on us already. That is what has happend. A “leagal” government has replaced our “Lawful” government and is and has convinced the masses that the “Lawful” government is a fraudulent, outdated, isolationist weakness and is harmful to their security. LOL, Liberty harmful to security!! Can anything be farther from the truth. I do agree with you though that some people open their mouths before they open their minds.

  • Nitroadict

    Valeria, I think the point concerning moving on is not so much submitting to the tyranny of the majority (democracy), so much as working with the majority and changing the “tyranny” to your advantage in the process of political change, specifically the local level.

    Albeit, I’m sympathetic to the argument of democracy being nothing more than a more evolved or recent version of the same type of tyranny we’ve experienced under other different rules; especially due to recent conversations over at the mises forum. In fact, it hasn’t stopped me from considering maybe something different from democracy is needed.

    However, I hardly see the phrase “die fighting”, implying a pre-mature (at this point) physical revolt, against a democracy that, while not perfect, is what we have now and is prone to produce favorable results sometimes, especially on the local levels.

    I think the call for RP?followers to become more Agoristic (I suppose that’s a word now) is right on the money concerning how the grassroots showed that technology is indeed catching up the possibility of a counter movement/economy/community being able to pick up steam & make a mark.

    Interestingly, I’m already reading of rather unexpected effects that the campaign’s failure (I would say literal failure, perhaps not idealogical) is already having. One prime effect is the renewed questioning of the relevance of the Libertarian Party, and whether abolishing it would be beneficial to the Libertarian cause (thus far, the arguments*, to me, are persuasive).

    [*You can read more of that in the following links:,, and ]

    Another effect, of which is extremely evident on this site, is the debate concerning alleged race-baiting, neo-confederate / confederate sympathizing, and even racist elements attributed to alleged figures (Rockwell, Rothbard, figures in the RP?campaign, the role of more radical supporters that support either the 911 truth movement, etc. etc.). It may be an ugly debate, but it’s imperative for any future national inroads towards change to occur.

    Personally, I think the whole cosmo/paleo/whatever divide online amidst Cato / Reason / Mises / Rockwell / whatever, will be more challenging, if not indirectly related to the aforementioned race-baiting debate.

    In any case, I tend to take the whole thing (a possible Libertarian movement “crisis”)in a historical perspective, for consider these few things:

    1.) Before Libertarianism became marginalized (obviously, people would vary when this happened), we did not have the immense decentralized power of communication of the Internet.

    Only in the last decade and a half, actually, has the Internet been a mass market commodity, and already we can see the effects. If nothing else, if Libertarians could ensure that The Internet (or at least an Internet) remains relatively preserved as such a communication tool, I think half the battle (for minds, anyways) is won.

    2.) The RP campaign, despite it’s failure, did in fact bring back in the once following alien terms to the mainstream: Libertarianism, blowback, Austrian economics, etc.

    Many people would debate the exposure was more negative rather than positive, but I was always under the impression of “there’s no such thing as bad publicity”. Obviously, the race-baiting debate would throw a hypothetical monkey wrench in that phrase, but that is course assuming there was a vacuum on the subject.

    This obviously not true; there is more than plenty of debate going around, whether intentional or non-intentional.


    3.) Many things, such as the effects of Centralized Banking, a fiat currency, are coming to an historical head, and with the above 2 points in mind, make it far more likely than ever that more attention will be paid to different alternatives to said problems.

    The same could be said in regards to civics; the fallout of 911, continuing occupation in Iraq, the do-nothing administration apologists in Congress, increasing calls for bi-partisanship (imo, further highlighting the lack of differences between the two major parties), one of the most abusive administrations in history: all of those are contributing to people looking out for alternatives to what they are used to. Not all obviously, but enough to contribute to a long term difference.

    If nothing else, things will become more interesting and are changing faster than I think some of us (myself included) can see, for the time being. Other’s may lambaste this site all they want (mostly out of what I see as short-sighted, naive idealism), but it is contributing to the public dialog just as much as insulting it for doing so contributes to the dialog.

    I for one am thankful that we do not have to waste time with fumbling with letters for an archaic newsletter via the mail (nostalgic value not withstanding), or deal with terribly delayed correspondence.

    Then again, flame wars were possibly more easily avoided since you could actually burn the papers themselves, but I digress.

    Stay Classy, Liberty Paper Critics.

  • Seth M

    I don’t think that Ron Paul’s campaign was the only one treated unfairly by the “establishment”.
    The people with the cash had their candidates primed and ready to go. Once it was clear that Ron Paul’s message was beginning to gain major traction, they set the demolition wheels to work.
    This has been happening for years and years and not just to Ron Paul.
    George Washington warned of the dangers of a two party system and now we’re living it.
    What do we do? “We the people” must unite in a way that we have never done before. We need to deregulate our political system and allow for more voices to be heard and taken seriously.

  • Craig

    There are a few less nefarious reasons why Ron Paul didn’t do as well as we had hoped:

    1. Too many pro-liberty Americans have already dropped out of the system, by not registering to vote, not turning out for the primaries, not investigating the candidates themselves, and not getting involved. Ron Paul reversed that to some extent, but there is a lot of defeatism to overcome.

    2. Too many people who liked Ron Paul and his message didn’t vote for him, because they wanted their votes to “count”. In Michigan exit polls for example, 12% said Ron Paul was the candidate best able to effect needed change, but only 6% voted for him! In New Hampshire, anti-war Republicans voted for McCain over Paul.

    Even if Ron Paul only had 5% national support, it would have been enough voters to win the nomination, if they had all registered as Republicans on time, and voted in the primaries, since primary turnout is so low. Even in a year with “high” turnout like this time, less than 20% of Republicans voted in most states, Republicans are only 1/3 of the registered voters, and only half the eligible population is registered. About 3% of the population is picking the Republican nominee.

    People have far more power than they realize, but for the most part they don’t even try to use it.

  • MME

    The Revolution continues with or without Ron Paul. Ron Paul accomplised exactly what he set out to do – ignite the brush fire in people’s minds.

    I now understand the monetary system and the desperate need for competing currencies. Europeans have had the advantage for years. I understand the hidden inflation tax imposed on us by the FED and why the FED is unconstitutional.

    I understand why we need to abolish the unconstitutional IRS. I know the IRS is a private collection company and NOT a government agency.

    I understand that all of the revenue the IRS collects goes to pay the interest on the debt. Interest charged to the American people by the Federal Reserve for the privilage of printing our fiat money.

    I will continue to spread the word and educate other American citizens.

    I will continue until every jury returns a verdict of NOT GUILTY for Federal Income Tax evasion, and puts the IRS out of business.

    We will shed so much sunlight on the FED and IRS vampires that they will no longer be able to suck the liberty, peace and prosperity out of the lives of the American people.

  • Dwight

    The good news for Ron Paul supporters is that the current system will eventually be eaten away from the inside by its own rottenness. People will always seek liberty over oppression. The bad news as that it appears the oppression will last a bit longer than many of us had hoped. Eventually Dr Paul will be vindicated. The only thing that remains to be seen is how much unnecessary suffering will be endured by all until then.

  • logicprobe

    Indeed, Ron Paul did ignite the brush fire, and it’s up to us to keep fanning the flames.

    It’s not about one election cycle, and it’s not about Ron Paul the man; the brush fire is fueled by the ideas that Ron Paul has promoted so eloquently for thirty-plus years.

    The grassroots volunteers who have coalesced around the Ron Paul campaign will keep talking about the ideas of freedom and a return to Constitutional government. These concepts are popular and resonate with many. We will prevail. We will change the world.

  • El Capitan

    YES, MME you got it exactly right! right on! we WILL prevail. and for those who keep refering to this as a democracy, you neeed to get yourself some education…this country was founded a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC! LOOK IT UP. MME was right about the Ron Paul effect. peace.

  • DX10

    I have been asking folks for over a year what they think of Dr. Ron Paul and in well over 90% of the time they have never heard of him. That is a fact. Once I explain his positions they respond favorably. Of course the MSM is opposed to his ideas as freedom is not in their best interest. But the campaign has to take some responsibility. There were areas where he won the popular vote, such as Spokane. My guess is that it was the work on the ground. And, that is probably where all of the $ should have gone in order to reach those who only get there information from the TV.

  • ricknhouston

    The hardest part for us Paulites will not be to stay united and build our movement …. it will be to figure out a way to make the rest of America realize that they have been infected with a virus that causes them to feel a false sense of security & serenity. What I believe our priority shoud be is to somehow demonstrate how demonic Main Stream Media is, especially when it comes to “broadcast media”. What do people really contemplate when they are about to lay out thousands and thousands of their hard earned dollars for the “newest generation of brain washing devices” disguised as flat screen HDTV’s. Do they understand that all this is is “media hype”? … Does it even cross their minds that this very expensive piece of technology will be obsolete before they turn it on for the first time? … Do they consider that if it ever stops working their only option is to throw it away? … Do they contemplate the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been invested into this medium of “entertainment” in terms of the effects of involuntary psychological, subliminal, physical, emotional and subconscious thought processes that have such a tremendous influence & impact on our daily lives. From talk shows to infomercials, commercials to news magazine shows, new reports late night movies… all of it! Every micro second of every minute of every hour …. our brains are bombarded with influential suggestions, subliminal messages, marketing data, political & religious prosthelitizing, what to buy, what to eat, what to wear, where to live, what to say & how to say it, what to think & what not to, who’s voice you will hear & who’s you won’t. Throw them away! Don’t give them away or sell them on e-bay…. destroy them! cancel your cable & satellite contracts …. you wanna do something for the environment ??? Stop buying newspapers and magazines … they’re POISON! 97% of ALL U.S. MEDIA IS OWNED BY 5 CORPORATIONS. THAT INCLUDES RADIO, TV, PRINT, MOVIES, DVD, CD, BILLBOARDS ….ALL OF IT! They are controlling our every thought and our every action and our every re-action. I urge everyone to do this. Google “Who Owns America’s Media”. You may & then you may not be that surprised. But after your read about it there will be no question in your own mind what today’s world events are all about and more importantly … who!

  • RaferJanders

    What is this poor little blog going to do?, You guys will fade into obsucrity, Doug you really are a bottom feeder, People need to accept the masses are just greedy and corupt as the government. It is not over yet. You and the Media said we were just a bunch of fringe nut cases and racists, Know with that said If I was McShame I would buy a Pope mobile, Because Its not over till your fat wife sings. remeber what Nathan Hale said, I regret that I have but one Life to give for my country. Now with that said. I going to get some Waves, I am tired of talking about the Fall of the American Empire.

  • Nitroadict

    RaferJanders, I think you are the perfect example of why this “little blog” tends to not take people such as yourself too seriously on such matters, when you utilize personal attacks as a basis for something vaguely resembling a cogent argument / flame.

    If the masses are greedy, at least they aren’t nearly as elitist and close-minded as you appear to be.

    Corrupt is as corrupt does; I personally find your lack of insight and assumptive attitude toward the peoples of this nation rather corrupt to the notions reason & civility.

    That being said, as long as you keep posting this blog, contributing to the debate & dialog, I hardly see how it’ll fade into obscurity anytime soon ;).

  • oilnwater

    ratings, ratings, ratings… hits, hits, hits…

  • Nitroadict

    M-M-M-M-Max Headroom would be proud.

  • Max

    Doug give it up dude, just face it, after the election no one will continue to come to your shitty blog anymore with you and your fan club, you have no credibility in the alternative media, you are an enforcer of the status quo and business as usual, you make me fucking sick, since you so fucking gung ho about the war on terror and the war in iraq why dont you go fight you fucking chicken hawk cowardly scum!!

  • Doug Mataconis

    Yes Max, I will truly, truly miss the insightful comments and erudite logic of the Paulistians that have visited over the past year ;)

    Of course, I grew up in New Jersey and miss Newark so that’s not saying much.

  • Doug Mataconis

    Oh and Max, for an example of what we talk about around here other than Ron Paul, check out these posts:


    I actually am beginning to think that the quality of writing, and comments, is better when we’re not talking about old news.

  • Max

    Sorry doug, I like many other people here only come here because you write about Ron Paul, while its about the message and not Ron Paul, Ron Paul has injected real issues into the debate and has brought a lot of new people into the freedom movement, Doug if you really cared about Liberty you would of helped the most pro liberty candidate in your life time(name another) Ron Paul was the most pro liberty candidate in many years and what did you do doug? you did everything in your power to tear him down

  • Dave

    I for one will still be involved in the delegate process. At the state level, we can change our party platform, and get rid of the diebold machines. In my precinct, where i canvassed for Paul, On super tuesday, 2 out of three diebold machines were replaced during the voting due to malfunction. The diebold officials assured us all votes would be counted. Excuse me for not having complete confidence in their honorable word. I will also be working on local campaigns, such as Murray Sabrin for senate, and the state congress campaign of a supporter.
    Having a strong showing at the RNC national convention is also important. If we could shock the world by getting a large number of votes for Paul, it could have a Goldwater like effect on the Republican party. Alot of republicans are not happy with the neo-con leadership, and if we can mount a viable challenge, I think many will join us. It has been an uphill battle, no doubt, against all the disinfo, but I would say we are doing very well. Look at how much more successful Paul’s campiagn was this time compared to his last presidential run. And think of how many high school fans who weren’t old enough to vote he has, as well has how many democrats who didn’t change party affiliation in time. This movement is not going away. I am going to stay with the republican party, but i think we can build an alliance with the libertarians, constitution party, and independents. If Paul doesn’t win, I might consider supporting the Candidacy of Chuck Baldwin, a Paul supporter who is running for prez under the Constitution Ticket.

  • Doug Mataconis


    Why do you think that anything I could do would help Ron Paul if I did decide to “help” him ?

    You vastly overestimate my skills of persuasion. Just ask my dog when I ask him to get off the couch.

    More importantly, I simply don’t agree with you that there is any value anymore in supporting Ron Paul. He has lost the nomination, as I always thought he would. It would be more productive to support candidates for other offices that have a pro-liberty agenda — unfortunately, there don’t seem to be any such persons in my neck of the woods.

  • MikeVA

    We need to continue to expose the corruption inherent in the ideologies of the people who own the system. We need to continue to push alternative media outlets that get around the traditional mainstream process and keep waking people up..

    I dream of the day when we reach critical mass — where everyone realizes they’ve been lied to about nearly everything! It could happen!!

    Look at how many people are awake enough to support Ron Paul in the primaries. These are not the kind of people that show up once to vote and go home. These are the diehards! And they are spread all over the country! All 50 states, and across the world!

    If things keep getting worse, which they likely will.. the establishment is going to be politically bankrupt before its all over. With every small erosion of sovereignty, with every downturn of the dollar, with every pledge to continue to finance is misguided war.. our viewpoint will become more vindicated! We might become totally broke but at least we might have the common sense to see through the BS and get real leadership back in charge.

  • Max

    Doug “status quo” Mataconis “well he has no chance so im not gonna try” Because doing nothing is better than doing something right? Fucking douche bag, your country on its knees, in a recession on a way to a depression, fighting perpetual war with no end in sight, and what does Doug do? Not a Fucking thing!

  • UCrawford


    Doug if you really cared about Liberty you would of helped the most pro liberty candidate in your life time(name another) Ron Paul was the most pro liberty candidate in many years and what did you do doug? you did everything in your power to tear him down

    Doug “status quo” Mataconis “well he has no chance so im not gonna try” Because doing nothing is better than doing something right? Fucking douche bag, your country on its knees, in a recession on a way to a depression, fighting perpetual war with no end in sight, and what does Doug do? Not a Fucking thing!

    Sounds like you’ve at least moved from the Denial phase of grieving into Anger. I suspect that the Bargaining phase will be taken care of by the Republican National Convention at which point you’ll be free to segue into Depression and then Acceptance. Best of luck on your recovery.

  • Doug Mataconis


    Ron Paul lost because the majority of voters disagreed with him and because he ran a campaign staffed by seeming incompetents.

    He didn’t lose because of anything I, or anyone else here, did or didn’t do.

    I’d be surprised if a single vote other than my own was impacted by what I wrote.

  • Max

    stfu fan club, fucking scum, UC make sure you invest all you money in stocks and bonds, I got a good feeling that you could make some killer money, so go take all the money you have and invest it in paper,k

  • Max

    “Ron Paul lost” Ron Paul and the movement didn’t lose a fucking thing, we pulled more people to the movement, injected real issues into the debate and proved that the grassroots can raise a shit load of money, and make it into televised debates reaching millions of more people, to you disliking im sure

  • Doug Mataconis


    To the extent that he had any intention of actually winning, Ron Paul lost.

    If something can be resurrected out of the ashes of this campaign and accomplish something for the good, then that will be to his credit, and, more importantly, to the credit of those who take things from here.

  • Max

    “to the credit of those who take things from here” God damn right you piece of shit, so you just sit on sidelines where you belong scum, and let the real patriots and lovers of liberty take the ball down the field.

  • Doug Mataconis


    You follow your strategy and worry about the Bilderbergers, I’ll follow mine.

    We’ll see who actually accomplishes something.

  • Aaron B. Walker

    Well, after reading the first 30 or so comments, I felt that I had to come on and clarify something around this whole assumption on the part of the media (and apparently several of you supposed Ron Paul supporters) that McCain has somehow “sealed” the nomination. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    The nominee is determined by THE PARTY… not the votes of the “people”. The votes of the people only HOPE TO INFLUENCE the votes of the delegates representing the GOP for their respective state, who, in many cases, can vote for whomever they want as their party’s nominee. Yes, some states “bind” their delegates to support the candidate who receives the popular vote in the primary, but many others do not.

    It is simply IMPOSSIBLE for McCain to claim that he has 1200+ delegate votes. Many STATE conventions have not even taken place yet, much less the national convention which, of course isn’t held until September. It is ONLY AT THE NATIONAL CONVENTION that the delegates cast their votes for THEIR choice as the party’s nominee. If McCain thinks he has the needed support of more than 1190 of those delegates, he is sorely, sorely mistaken. The GOP largely HATES McCain and will not support him for the nomination. With all other candidates dropping out of the race, this leaves only Paul, McCain and technically Romney (because he only “suspended” his campaign) left to fight over delegate votes AT THE CONVENTION. Paul understand this very well and is probably one of the many reasons why McCain hasn’t gotten the traditional “congratulatory phone call”. The fact that McCain has some hollow “endorsement” from President Bush is MEANINGLESS from a delegate standpoint. (President Bush has a 20-something percent approval rating, so I’m really struggling to see how is “endorsement” would even be helpful to McCain.)

    In Texas, I know that in my precinct convention, and many others across the state as well, we passed many “pro Paul” resolutions… one of which was a vote of no confidence in McCain. There is a very real undercurrent of dislike for McCain and when he shows up in September expecting to just walk up on stage and simply accept the nomination by default, he is going to get a rude awakening. (Of course McCain already knows everything I just told you… but, like the media, is simply refusing to acknowledge the truth… very few people actually support him and he absolutely DOES NOT have the nomination wrapped up.)

    ATTENTION RON PAUL SUPPORTERS!! The fight is not over… not even close… Paul WILL be speaking at the convention and we WILL have a very strong delegate presence there. Under the party rules, the convention must acknowledge us their attempt to do so would be about as futile as stretching forth their hands to alter the course of the Mississippi River.

  • Max

    “worry about the Bilderbergers” Doug that a conspiracy theory Bilderberg doesn’t exist? Right?

  • Doug Mataconis


    I will ask you the same question I’ve asked a few people and never gotten a response to:

    1. Explain to me the reason why a candidate who has gotten less than 10% of the total votes cast in Republican primaries has a legitimate claim to be the nominee of his party.

    I don’t want to hear about party rules or how it is theoretically possible for it to happen, I want you to tell me what moral right someone who most Republicans have voted against has to the nomination of their party ?

    2. Assuming that what you say can happen actually does happen, explain to me how you will convince the rest of American and the Republican Party that you haven’t, in fact, stolen the nomination.

    Personally, I think all you guys are deluding yourselves.

  • Doug Mataconis


    I don’t believe in whacko conspiracy theories.

  • Nitroadict

    Max, I believe The Daily Kos would be a better suited arena for your unwarranted malice & lack of reasoning…

    But hey, as long as you’re here, we’re out of Cheeze-It’s for the big game. I dunno about you, but I think the Bilderberg Bullies are going to cream the Liberty Lads this year with Mataconis as their new “quarterback”.

  • UCrawford


    stfu fan club, fucking scum,

    Good…use your aggressive feelings, young Skywalker. Let the hate flow through you.

    UC make sure you invest all you money in stocks and bonds, I got a good feeling that you could make some killer money, so go take all the money you have and invest it in paper

    Gosh, thanks for the tip Max…I’ll be sure to write all your good ideas and prescient observations down and file them in my “important papers” box that only coincidentally looks like a shredder.

  • Whacko?
  • Max

    “whacko conspiracy theories” LOL Besides the fact that its a real institution with real people!!!

    They media covers davos, G8 etc but when 150 of the US and European elite meet in secret not a word. For sure, Doug just because you say it doesn’t exist does not make it fact.

    And lastly Doug please stop writing about Ron Paul for traffic

  • Max

    Whacko you shouldn’t show them those video clips, the New World Order isn’t real, besides the fact they talk about it constantly in books, interviews and speeches

  • Nitroadict

    Interestingly, Scientologists talk about Lord Xenu constantly in books, interviews, and speeches, but I’m sure not inferring in anyway that it’s not true. It must be true if other people talk about it, because then you’re not the only one! It all makes sense now…

    But seriously, I do tend to be sympathetic to the concept of say, The Bilderberg Group existing, as well as other groups such as the SPP & CFR. But the vast overall glow of some type of overt conspiracy just further discredits any type of actual wrong doing or illegal activity being done by any of these groups that actually exist. It also overshadows the concept of evidence required, rather than heresey & myth.

    The concept of Bankers pulling strings for profits is considerably more believeable than an NWO conspiracy, as it follows Occam’s razor much more closley than this grand conspiracy. If anything, believing in such grand conspiracies could be the conspiracy itself, wherin people who believe in such lose sight of what they can change and do to make things better. Where people lose sight of reality and begin believing in falsified versions of reality perpetuated by denial, and the human instinct to look for patterns & underlying causes. Where such a grand conspiracy becomes a scapegoat for the conspiracy believer’s own sense of powerlessness and/or paranoia in their own lives.

    Essentially, I do not believe in the myth, the legend of the NWO. But like all good legends and myths, it is probably based extremley loosley (and derivatley) on some piece of reality, which I would wager being corporate bankers, since it fits overall with a continuing theme of a wealthy elite in societies throughout history.

    The NWO conspiracy is perpetuated by people struggling to understand, and I can sympathize that this is only human. But they must be open to the possibility that they are wrong. They must be able to accept that the conspiracy itself is probably hurting the chances of possible criminal action being discovered by people who do not believe in the conspiracy, but being rooted in reality, know that not all men are good & don’t have the best of intentions.

    Sometimes, the best hiding spot is in plain sight (i.e. NO conspiracy). The conspiracy theories, imo, reinforce this and prevents otherwise intelligent people from seeing the reality of things.

  • DX10

    Doug, the question is why is he only getting a small percentage of the vote. Is it because the voters reject Dr. Paul’s message or is it because they really never heard it? If the latter, then he should get the chance to air his views to the delegates. If his arguments are not persuasive then he certainly won’t be the nominee. No problem.

  • Max

    So all these groups exist but its no big deal?

    Equating Scientology and Lord Xenu with the NWO? Nice straw man argument.

  • Max

    “Is it because the voters reject Dr. Paul’s message or is it because they really never heard it?”

    Well put

  • Doug Mataconis


    Paul was included in all the debates. He was all over the Internet. Any voter interested him could have found out about him easily.

    If his message didn’t get out sufficiently then the only blame lies with a campaign that did not do it’s job.

  • Nitroadict


    It was a comparison. I was equating the assumptions a persona can make when “x” amount of people or sources of news say one thing, but this persona believes something else, but soon this person adjust their own views based on a seeming majority opinion, on the basis that if “everyone else thinks it’s true, then it must be true.” This can also be related with, “if you repeat a lie long enough, people will believe you.” I’m sorry, but I fail to see how in any way I exaggerated your views, other than with a (at first glance) superficial comparison. Perhaps I should’ve just written the above instead.

    I obviously was speaking to deaf and unwilling ears. Perhaps the belief structure built around the conspiracy theory gives you too much comfort to be able to question it.

  • Nitroadict

    person* [stupid typos]

  • Max

    Nitro, Bilderberg, CFR, TC, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones, are real institutions with REAL people who have an agenda and if you dont see that I feel sorry for you

  • Mythic Mystic

    How come most of the people I have talked to in the past six months have said, when I ask if they have heard about Paul “…Is he still in the race?” Most people get their news from TV and not the internet. Also most people want to be associated with winners so anytime he was at debates or on TV he was told or asked “You’re not going to win!”, “About elect ability, Sir, do you have any?”, and “He has no chance.” Sounds like a winner already! Besides, how much time did he have? All of this is besides the point now. He has his congress seat back so we will not have 100% unanimous liberty destroying bills passed. At least those bills will have one dissenting voice for the future generations to observe (if allowed by “law”). I do thank you for opening this debate.

    you won’t win people over with vulgarities. I understand your frustration but it’s not going to convince anyone by cursing people out. Use your mind, not your behind!

    The word “Conspiracy Theory” has become a religious mantra used by people stuck in paradigms. That is fine, as Karl Rove has said “Truth is just a matter of opinion.” so I guess all of your statements are true. BTW – SPP is not a group, it’s an agreement. I remember when NAFTA was considered a conspiracy theory. The question is, who can afford to be wrong? I personally HATE conspiracy theories and governments perpetuate them with secrecy and heavy handedness double standards. If “they” have nothing to hide, show us the money!! Most of these people some are calling “Conspiracy Theorist” are just citizens asking questions and getting shouted down by the groupthink mentality that has presented it’s self in modern America. Ask your self why the “theorists” are being proven right everyday (i.e. the economy, torture, NAFTA, corruption, false flag terror, ect…) You can latch on to the most wild “theorists” that try to shill things all day, but don’t lump in those who want transparency and honest government. Some people just want answers to their questions and they are not getting them. Hello, redress of grievances!!

    Occam’s razor can become dulled when cutting outside the box. LOL! I do think a national debate and exploration about the “facts” involved with these “theories” needs to be conducted so we can move passed all of this and achieve our destiny as humans. A species that out last their parent star is a success, anything less is extinction and pointless.

  • Nitroadict

    Did you not read my previous response? There is no need to feel sorry for a person who considers possibilities. If human history has taught us anything, aside from that it repeats itself, is that anything is possible.

    There is however, reason to feel sorry for one who believes in these possibilities with an absolute certainty that would make religious fundamentalists jealous.

    I will not apologize for desiring logic, reason, evidence and civility in a conversation regarding those institutions & organizations you have listed.

  • Doug Mataconis

    Mythic Mystic,

    Perhaps it’s because most Americans don’t pay attention to politics as much as you and I do.

    If anyone is to blame for the fact that voters don’t know who he is, though, it’s the campaign. That’s their job.

  • Nitroadict

    @ Mystic: I use the term conspiracy theorist for those who automatically assume a certain theory is true (I could easily call some global warming advocates conspiracy theorists by this criteria).

    I see no harm in reading up on these theories, or the ideas within the theories, and in considering possibilities, but I do see harm in accepting them and shouting them as dogma that, if someone else questions it’s validity, it is automatically assumed that person “doesn’t know better”.

  • Li

    I’m going to start with the basics: vote consistantly, move my votes towards liberterian Republicans and even consider Liberterians, and donate time, energy, and money to campaigns of such (something I had never done before Paul).

    And someday, I’d like to chase office. For now I’m focused on the franchise I’m opening up.

  • James Moore

    Any fool can see that the campaign & the grass-roots did a reasonable job of getting the message out, where we could.

    That’s why Ron Paul is the internet king of candidates, because that’s the one mass-media place where ordinary people could promote the message.

    If the mass-media had truly done IT’s job, the job of reporting the news without turning it into a sales pitch, or (in Ron’s case) an attack, every other person we talk to would not be saying “who’s Ron Paul?”

    Lots of people ignore the debates. Lots of people don’t have cable, believe it or not. When broadcast TV is your main source for news, your chances of supporting the Ron Paul message are slim to nil. This is not because the message is wrong, it’s because the delivery is either not there, or delivered with a side of “ridicule this.”

  • James Moore

    We don’t have non-partisan news. ALL news outlets these days have made entertainment their priority. How can we expect proper news reporting in such an enviornment, I ask you.

  • Nitroadict

    Actually, in many ways the mass-media did do it’s job: mass-media thrives on conflict, drama, negativity. What better a way of generating those things than blacking and/or browning out certain events, objects, names, and persons from media exposure?

  • Doug Mataconis


    It is not the job of the media to give Ron Paul free advertising.

  • James Moore

    Like I said, they have turned to entertainment. It’s not the job of the news media to entertain, that is the job of the rest of the television industry. But, somwhere oh about 30 years ago or more, the popular culture found the news boring. There was talk about how to get the ratings of news programs up. The solution was to make the news entertainment. As soon as that decision was made, any remaining objectivity in the reporting of news became doomed.

  • James Moore

    It is not the job of the media to give anyone free advertising.

    It is also not the job of the media to ignore substantive news in favor of what Britney and Paris are up to, but they do it. It’s not the job of the media to tell me where McCain ate lunch, but given a choice of reporting that vs Ron Paul grilling Ben Bernanke on economics, what do we get?

    But, if that’s what Americans are drawn to, the media is just supplying the demand. Trouble is that was never intended to be the job of NEWS reporting. Entertainers entertain, news should be provided without bias. At one time, this was understood. Now, it’s not “trendy” or “popular” to simply tell the truth.

  • DX10

    Even though he won the debate vote that was by the internet, so no wonder. You know very well how he was treated by the media to leave a negative impression with the TV addicts.

  • James Moore

    You got it DX10. Too many people pre-programmed by the idiot box. It took me two months to even consider Paul, and I’ve been looking for candidates that fight the Duopoly for over 20 years. How many people do you suppose never even approached that wall, let alone looked over it?

  • Doug Mataconis


    As much as you complain about the media, remember this.

    They only cover what people want to hear and see.

    And the First Amendment protects them, just as it should.

  • Doug Mataconis


    Please don’t tell me you take an internet poll seriously.

    I mean really, you’re kidding right ?

  • James Moore

    “They only cover what people want to hear and see.”

    Duuhhh, really? Didn’t I just say that?

    The media is responding to demand, and supplying a steady stream of entertainment. People historically find the news boring, therefore the news organizations changed their focus away from news and on to entertainment.

    So, people are getting what they are asking for. At one time, the news wasn’t expected to be entertaining, just truthful. I’m just lamenting the fact that not all of us need or care for our news to be entertaining – but who is supplying our demand? No one in the broadcast television industry, that’s for sure. What good is television now that it’s so overwhelmed with propaganda and spin? Not much good for picking a good leader, but what average person on the street “gets” that?

  • DX10

    Of course it depends on how it is run. I was just pointing out that the preponderance of support for Dr. Paul is on the internet. So, for whatever reason you would expect him to do well in the post debate voting.
    Did you watch the Russert Meet the Press interview with Dr. Paul? Fire was coming out of Tim’s eyes. That typifies the treatment afforded Dr. Paul by the media. You don’t think all those people that voted for McCain really hate the thought of liberty, do you?

  • Dave

    The NWO is a conspiracy of ideas. You’re right Doug. It is bankers and corporate and political leaders. They have a philosophical belief in a global economic and political system that binds sovereign nations to its decisions. These institutions do in fact exist, in the form of groups like the WTO and IMF, and numerous others. The fact that these groups are not made up of elected officials, but powerful individuals who feel they “know better” then the people their decisions affect, means that we have allowed decisions that affect our nation and the world and as a whole to be conducted without checks and balances, or indeed, the consent of the governed. You will find that the same core group of people sets the policy direction for all these groups. It is not some grand conspiracy, it is simply the human tendency for elites to consolidate their power. It is a threat, as the degree to which these groups can influnce the political processes of nations and the media, by ways of the purse string, does give them an undue degree of influence. They themselves describe the system they desire as a “New World Order.” It has nothing to do with the illuminati, satan, or aliens, or anything else so fantastic. It is a philosophy of centralized economic planning that traditionally this nation has stood against. The technology now available for such a system makes it truly terrifying, as the degree of control that could potentially be excersized over the world economy if say, the verichip were ever to become the means of world economic transaction, accompanied by the increased surveillance powers of modern states, would make dissent and outside change nearly impossible.

  • Web Smith

    This country will not elect a Libertarian for President until there are many Libertarians in government. It would be much easier just to claim the Republican party than to establish a new one. 5% of the population could do this. As Ron has said many times, the Republican party used to stand for the things that he promotes and those things are what the Constitution is based on. The current party does not represent Republicans. Google Republicanism.

    Media outlets reflect the views of their owners. Any good reporter will tell you this. When a media company changes hands, reporters who do not go along are replaced. The Tribune Company is a recent example. It is now pro-Zionist and against anyone who would not support Israel. A number of reporters had to leave or were fired after Zorn took over. The Rothschilds are involved with FOX, the Rockefellers control Time Warner, and, we’re getting into the dreaded conspiracy theory area now.

    The words “conspiracy theory” are used like the words racist and antisemitic are used to quell criticism. In the beginning if you would suggest that the Duke boys might be innocent, you would be called a racist. Anyone who comes up with facts that might suggest that things aren’t exactly what the government is telling you is dismissed by calling them a conspiracy nut. It’s a conspiracy.

    Do you think that we might get more air time if we came up with a more entertaining figurehead than Ron Paul the next time around? Maybe we need someone who would walk into FOX News, CNN, and MSNBC and pound on some desks and call people puppets and Fascists. Maybe we can come up with a word or too that shuts people down like conspiracy theory, racist, or anti-semitic.

    Maybe we can just quietly take control of the Republican party.

  • Fascist Nation

    As for me, all of your reasons are correct. The people who control everything direct the media on what to say and what not to say, produce the polls, produce the election results with fraudulent voting machines paid for by taxpayer dollars stolen at gun point from the earners.

    Ah, that was fun. A unification conspiracy theory.

    As to what I am going to do? Just kick back and watch the economy collapse around me. When $10,000 won’t buy you a loaf of bread, then I get to watch whether you fold like your ancestors or fight. I bet on fold. Enjoy the cheese lines.

  • Whacko?

    The NWO isn’t really a conspiracy as much as it is a particular mindset/ideology. You see this mindset manifesting itself in the soft term of “globalism” and more specifically in institutions such as the UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO, Trilateral Comission, NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT.. etc.

    Nitroadict – I challenge you to actually watch the links. You will see George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Henry Kissinger, Gordon Brown all espousing grand ideas of a world government and “New World Order”.

  • TruthBeTold

    What is left? What we intended all along.

    To take back the republican party. We are getting involved and running for local and other offices. Setting up PAC’s.

    The Republican party will be so decimated after Nov that Bush will probably fall off the wagon.

    Things are going along swimingly.

  • Whacko?

    You must also admit, that if Bill Clinton started talking about Lord Xenu that you might think, “wtf??”

  • Integr8d

    Anyone notice how when Thompson was the hot ticket, you couldn’t turn on the tv without seeing Diehard 2 being run 3 times a day? What’s on now? Try Iron Eagle and Behind Enemy Lines both 3 times a day. In my opinion, a not so subtle attempt at propping up a certain sell-out POW.

  • Idaho

    It’s about the Constitution.
    I went looking for a candidate (either party, any party) who would defend our Constitution.
    Not too much to ask- the one oath that all our Presidents take… and all I wanted was someone that would keep that oath.
    Then I ran across Ron Paul. Need I say more?
    He embodied the addressing of my concerns wonderfully- I could not hope for more.
    But again, this is NOT about Ron Paul.
    See my first sentence.

  • ronstratton

    What you do is join organisations like Cato that believe like Ron Paul and work within the best system humans have ever produced to change it from within. The immaturity of demanding everything be done our way now is so left wing 60’s bullshit that it is laughable. The socialists, and right wing semi-fascists have had 70 years of domination to establish thought control…but..there never was, or will be, a blueprint as perfect as the US Constitution.. save it, use it and work within it.. but defend it. Ron Paul has shone light on darkness..take advantage of it.

  • Nitroadict

    @ Whacko

    I honestly don’t need to watch the links, but I might watch them if I time this morning. You are not challenging me at all; I am not some close-minded simpleton who screams foul every time someone disagrees with me. I’ve read a good deal in the ideas within the NWO conspiracy (on my own), and my stance is essentially this:

    I think many of the ideas within the NWO?conspiracy should be considered, just like any other possibilities. I think that many of the ideas could be taken more seriously if they were dealt without the label NWO conspiracy attached to them. I am not blind and have noticied many politicans and figures espousing the ideas of a “New?World Order”.

    To me, there is nothing New to this hypothetical NWO. It simply is a label put upon various ideas from people in wealthy and high positions who have the ability to flex their will & achieve their own agendas. The ideas and/or mechanics of any possible NWO have been going on for centuries in terms of the existence of a wealthy elite within society, just as the very existence of a wealthy elite seems to always spring up in society itself, but that’s another matter entirely.

    It’s all old hat to me, and I think if NWO conspiracy believers were to take some logic & civility to the situation, and studied the more realistic historical background / records of wealthy elites throughout societies (throughout history), people would be more open minded. Considerably more so than this “WAKE?UP?SHEEPLE” poppycock that only serves to alienate people and preach to the alarmist choir.

    I’m sorry If I don’t take an alarmist approach to the situation. But I also accept that, immediately at least, I have more pressing concerns on my mind, and for that matter, concerns I have more control over. One of them being the fact that I have yet to eat breakfast, and now my stomach is mad at me.

  • Nitroadict

    Also, in addition, I also think that the following explains much more effectively anything that this NWO purports to blow the lid off of:

    the wealthy 1% to 3% of various countries (saying elite sounds alarmist, occasionally) + globalism + new emerging technologies (this includes The Internet).

    The fact that we have, for the past decade, been in the transition to an Information Age doesn’t hurt either.

  • Whacko?

    Hehe I might post a more thorough reponse.. gotta get breakfast myself. But what you were talking about reminded me of this video, I love it:

  • jen

    It’s all about the injustices done to the American People and our country.
    Ron Paul voiced it and we are standing behind our man!
    Our country is being undermined as power is taken from our spineless elected officials by corporate profiteers..The current president (those to pull the puppet stings for him) of the United states feels he needs no input from congress that all they need do is YEH him or he vetos, all for the well being of overseas US corporations..He wants bill passed to give away our rights, our land and wants corporations who benefit him to have free reign to hit other countries economically and turn other countries in to Terrorist if they don’t conform, making them hate us and attack us. We have been assaulted and insulted to the point where it’s intolerable. Deals are being made with out congressional oversight and behind the American peoples backs! The fear mongering of the administration and the press is unacceptable and shows just how much a failure our officials really are. Our society is sick and we had a Doctor to help us..Dr. Ron Paul, our VOICE..
    We have had enough of Nafta, Cafta, wto, owo, gatt, and all those unconstitutional, corporate favors and treason against the American people and their land.
    Shame that it has come this far and that our White house is doing this to us or at least letting it happen.

  • John-Ross Swanstone Cromer

    Go Ron Paul!

  • jen

    What would YOU like to do about it???

  • Whacko


    Firstly, the term a “New World Order” should not be off-limits. If presidents and high-ranking officials can openly discuss the term, than it is a matter of public record and is undeniable. We need to get over this in my opinion. If there is an alarmist connotation to the phrase, than we need to get over that.

    There is indeed nothing new to the New World Order, other than it begs the question.. “If this is a New World Order” what is the Old World Order? The Old World Order is one where nation states are independent, have full sovereignty over their lands, and are free to deal with each other as they please.

    The New World Order is one where nation states are locked into interdependence, they have recognized mutual authorities and treaties to who which they can bring their grievances with each other. If one nation wants to raise tariffs on my goods their hands are tied because they are locked into the WTO, whose tribunal can force that nation to lower their tariffs for me.

    The only thing that is truly new about the New World Order, is that the wealthy class are severing their ties to their own nations and are going global.

  • El Capitan

    Doug, I hope you know that we can all see what you’re doing, we’re not stupid…well…not all of us. Max, Idaho, Aaron, and DX10 are right, they are all patriots who support the ONLY patriotic candidate, Ron Paul. “We The People” will not stop, Doug, we will not stop fighting for our rights and freedoms, we will continue to support Dr. Paul. I’m sorry for you that you cannot comprehend WHY we continue our support. “We The People” will be voting for Ron Paul wether it counts or not, write in or not, nothing can change our minds about that.

  • Mythic Mystic

    I agree, most people care more about the Spears girl-like drama than about our national/state/local politics. “There has never been a nation ignorant and free”. Almost sad really.

    Paul has made many mistakes in this round of running for POTUS. He had raised so much money but hadn’t spent nearly enough to “get the word out” himself. Many of his supporters have been upset because of that. Not to mention he virtually said nothing when he was getting 0 votes in areas in NH where whole families voted for him. Not a word other than we have to move on. That , I believe, was the beginning of the end of his national campaign. Many felt betrayed for not making a bigger “to-do” about it. Besides that, his TV ads were awful!! I am a supporter of liberty and Ron Paul is my guy this year because I can not stomach the other choices, but damn, he needed to put a little more effort into it instead of JUST relying on the “grassroots”. Which, you have to admit (regardless of effectiveness) was quite impressive with imagination and energy. Ron Paul isn’t going to win but I do love our great nation and hope one day we do get a true defender of the constitution into office, instead sell outs.

    Well put. Although I can understand the frustration that some have that often spills over to aggressiveness and often leads to their ridicule and the whole cycle begins again. It becomes an endeavor of circular arguments. I do agree that some of the most ardent “theorists” are often filled with more zeal than a Pope on Sunday, but I admire the conviction. Now once we figure out what went wrong with the education system, the family, and corruption in our government we could calm these “fears” down. It’s amazing that most of the people that decry “the politics of fear” use it as well to make a point. The whole NWO idea is not a “group” but a mindset. Can you deny we are in a “globalized world”? Of course not, we hear and see about it every day. I think the biggest problem about this is there is virtually no debate on the effects of globalizm on our nation, the family, and the individual. Not to mention sovereignty. I think a lot of people feel globalizm is being shoved down our throats and we “just have to except that”. Then we get into these ridiculous shouting matches that involve all sorts of semantical arguments that miss the real point. Yes globalizm is real, and no there has not be a real debate about it’s effects on us and the world. What is the endgame of it all? Once we make this whole thing more transparent most of these “conspiracies” will go away. Secracy breeds conspiracy, no secrets = no conspiracies. If you want to get rid of “conspiracy theorists” you have to get rid of the secracy that breeds it. Now I’m not talking about opening out weapon secrets up for the world to see, but if our nation has been up to no good we need to come to terms with that and reclaim our former good name. Thanks for the reply. May the light of truth shine on you all always!

  • Nitroadict

    Indeed, Mystic. The mindset of the NWO is something I truly despise, as I truly think it limits the debate of the actual mechanics of said supposed NWO.

    The label itself I suppose is useful in a debate, similar to the label “Libertarianism”, but with the label comes views assorted from serious skeptics to alarmist theorists who run amok in circular arguments concerning validity.

    The correlation between secrecy and conspiracy is also quite true. This is one of the lessons I think we are learning, in spades I might add, with the advent of a much more inter-connected world, open-source vs. closed source, calls for transparency, globalism, etc.

    However, while we are on the precipe of such a world taking a permanent residence in our foreseeable history, (because whether or not we like, some version of this increasingly inter-connected, interdependent world is coming towards us), we can also see the dangers that this changing word is presenting.

    One prime danger, I think, is what whacko mentioned concerning bankers severing ties with their nationality, more openly creating their own class of self-declared and self-financed rule, and essentially trying to keep things the “same” in terms of the countries of the world’s own population not having true power or control over their country due to the “man behind the curtain”.

    Again, though, I think the motivation is not under some grand scheme for a NWO, rather the tried and true “for profit” motive. I think the NWO concept is incidental to the more believable motive of “for-profit”.

    Of course, desiring profit also yields a desire for more power. I also tend to think of the NWO concept as simple smoke & mirrors in some cases, to re-direct people’s rightful suspicion & concern upon themselves, in a possible tactic to prevent people from educating themselves, debating and discussing with others, in an effort to change things.

    Of course, I also study memetics, so think of that what you will, I suppose.

    I appreciate the debate that has taken place on this page, honestly. With the influx of Digg users migrating to Reddit, I had thought serious debate and/or conversation of such matters were unlikely 8D.

  • oilnwater

    arguments addressing a New World Order are appropriate, no matter what the nomenclature of the NWO is at any given time. after all, it is simply a discussion of the power elite. any sociologist will acknowledge the power elite. and philosopher will agree that logically, a power elite exists in some structure globally. but you try to mention this to anyone who doesn’t actually think, and you just feel like giving up.

  • Nitroadict

    ***Of Course, in the case of the world bankers supposedly controlling things (there is no direct cold hard evidence, AFAIK, but there are implications and suggestive leads)desiring profit also yields a desire for more power.

    I had to revise that sentence, as I meant as far as the motivations for these bankers are concerned;?I was not generalizing the desire for profit as a desire for ‘ultimate power’. Dare I say it almost read like anti-capitalist drivel; I suppose the coffee was getting to me.

  • oilnwater

    i would venture to say that in an era dominated by fiat currency, whoever a “central banker” is supposed to be, that person(s) wouldn’t be as worried about profit like a traditional corporation. since this person(s) print money, their wealth and profit at any time is as easy as changing a computer screen. to be totally reductionist about central banking.

  • Mythic Mystic

    That is an excellent point Oilnwater. The “banksters” that print money could care less about profit. A famous “Bankster” once said “Give me control of a nations’ money and I care not who makes the laws.” Scary indeed. Once you print too much money your currency becomes more and more worthless which makes it easier for those “banksters” to buy up large swaths of property by defaults on loans and plain desperate people with no choice but to sell (besides, banks have a diversified portfolio of currencies and assets at their disposal to counter act our falling dollar). Then on top of that you add in the emanate domain ruling a while back ago where property from one privet owner can be taken by the government and given to another privet owner instead of use for public works projects of necessity. So what is the motive? Well, control, power, and the ability to operate with out checks & balances or regulations that help protect the individual. I’m not one to promote over-regulation but some (to protect “the people”) are necessary.

    Memetics, huh. Isn’t that the same as mass psychology (sort of)? Well, that is a fine “theory” but more needs to be studied about that. It is almost a dogma within it’s self when you think about it. I think it is often angled to the “masses” to help label or group people together so propaganda can be used easier, but can also relate to those “at the top” if it is held to a true scientific standard. But that can be a whole other debate. Good food for thought though. I guess it can relate to the zeitgeist theory as well, in a way.

  • Nitroadict

    It’s much different than psychology; psychology, as a field of science, is way too narrow for it’s own good. The problem is probably the opposite for memetics*, as it sprawls and expands into many differing sciences (I suppose it could be called a meta-science? I’m probably not using the prefix correctly…). It utilizes psychology, somewhat, but it also utilizes several other sciences such as sociology, biology; such as the relation of meme to gene).

    *[for those interested: ]

    Memetics, at this point, is an interesting neo-darwinian proto-science which aims to be an analoge to genetics; only it deals with information (& information transmission), not genes.

    There is still much work to be done to get it to the point where Biology is, so you’ll hear no argument from me that it has a while’s way to go to being an empirical science.

    Interesting you mention the zeitgeist, as a certain animation series called Ghost In The Shell deals with the possibility of machines having a “ghost” or “spirit”, which somehow allows them consciousness. Of course, if you have a bit of an Objectivist-streak, you might want to stay clear of such nonsense :p.

    But I do think it (memetics) will show it’s importance more and more as we delve further into the Information Age / a more Information-based economy/society. If nothing more, it is infact interesting stuff that’s great for a read if your trying to get brain working in the morning.

    Then again, I’m terrible at sudoku, so to each their own, I guess.

  • Mythic Mystic

    I try not to limit myself to be a total objectivist, a bit skeptical yes, but I don’t out right cast anything aside as out of hand. We need out-of-the-box thinking to evolve effectively as a species. I will have to look into that more as I am aware of metetics but not well versed in the whole concept. I do like the approach that it takes to go outside the confines of the scientific spheres of study. Metetics sounds also like a basis for future AI programming. I have seen Ghost in a Shell in video stores but never viewed it. I kind of got the premise of it from friends who have seen it before. I’ll have to check it out now. If you think about it, matter is merely energy condensed and though chemical and electrical reactions help create what we call life (and/or consciousness), so I would not doubt the possibility of machines with consciousness or, in the macrocosm, even a galactic consciousness (God?). That is neither here nor there at this time. Now we are getting WAY off subject, LOL. Thanks for the info and your candor on this subject.

    Amazing how an article about Ron Paul turned into this! Ha!

  • Whacko

    .. again they say, it not me..

    Thanks for a pretty objective conversation.

    “…This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of “one world government’….National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept…” Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, cofounder of Trilateral Commission, Foreign Policy Advisor to Barack Obama

    The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial, political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a ‘League of Nations’ or a ‘Federated Union’ to which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the ‘New International Order,’ ‘The New World Order,’ ‘World Union Now,’ ‘World Commonwealth of Nations,’ ‘World Community,’ etc. All the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according to the taste or training of the individual.” Excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention (October 1940)”The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down…but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault.” CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFR’s journal, Foreign Affairs.

    “But this present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for long. Already there are powerful forces at work that threaten to destroy all of our hopes and efforts to erect an enduring structure of global interdependence.” David Rockefeller, speaking at the Business Council for the United Nations, September 14, 1994.

    “The Persian Gulf crisis is a rare opportunity to forge new bonds with old enemies (the Soviet Union)…Out of these troubled times a New World Order can emerge under a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders.” President George Bush, September 11, 1990.

    “NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order.” Henry Kissinger when campaigning for the passage of NAFTA.

    “In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.” Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

  • Mythic Mystic

    There is an effort to move towards a World Government (or World Governance). It’s a concept that dates back more than 100 years. Anyone who denies that is still living in the 19th and 20th century. Walter Cronkite recently (before 2000) got the Norman Cousins Global Governance Award from the World Federalist Association at the United Nations.

    The man known as “The Most Trusted Man In America” said in his acceptance speech:

    “It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace,”

    he continued:
    “To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order.”

    Hillary Clinton came on CCTV to congratulate Mr.Cronkite on accepting the award.

    Well if you can’t trust Walter Cronkite that there is a move towards world government and to destroy ALL nations sovereignty, who can you trust?

    Nuff said…

  • Nitroadict

    Cronkite may have been a prominent fighter for free speech in his heyday, but you should never put your eggs all in one basket with figures in media such as himself. Cronkite, lilke many other’s, probably see (possibly due to leftist-liberal views) that world government is inevitable and they hardly see the harm in such a thing occurring.

    Remember, the democrat socialists see the state as this “friend who is always there, looking out for ya”. To my knowledge, this concept of a parentalist-state being invisible and somehow not connected with the oppression of liberty has hardly even worked out in fiction, as Star Trek would attest(DS9 comes to mind, primarily).

    Honestly, I see very little reason for disillusionment due to Cronkite’s stance. I really wouldn’t even give him the satisfaction of importance due to the traitorous nature of his remarks are to the concept of our sovereignty Constitution.

    Of course, in the “new world order”, Constitution writes you! They’ll probably just poo-poo such worries with “Well there’s nothing to worry about if we make a *new* constitution!”

    With such, I can only end with a face-palm.

  • dom youngross

    “So the question still stands. For those truly adamant Ron Paul supporters who believe that he deserves to lead this country, and cannot accept the fact that he will not be President in November, what are you going to do about it?”


    What, you’ve got an infallible crystal ball with which you can foresee future events? Then tell me whose going to win the 2nd race at Santa Anita during any day in the first week of Sept. this year.

    Myself, I voted for Paul in my state’s primary. Now I wait to see what happens next. Anything and everything, or nothing at all, can happen between now (Mar. 08) and the Republican convention 1-4 Sept. 08.

    I don’t make ‘excuses’ for Paul’s performance to date, as reported in the media. I do think it’s a valid point to state delegates are not necessarily committed to McAmnesty. To many, perception is reality.

    What happens next, happens next. Who will be President in ’09 will be President.

  • Nitroadict

    I don’t mean to beat a dying horse, but I thought this article particularly good at taking a level-headed approach to the NWO conspiracy theory:

  • Pingback: The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » Tuesday Open Thread: Why Ron Paul Failed, And Where The “r3volution” Goes From Here()