The Ron Paul Factor

What Does The Future Hold For The $5 Million Man?

(CBS)  This story was written by CBSNews.com political reporter Brian Montopoli.

---

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul announced this week that he raised more than $5 million in the third quarter, a figure that put him in the orbit of Arizona Sen. John McCain ($6 million) and far ahead of Mike Huckabee ($1 million). [The former is considered one of the leading contenders for the Republican nomination, and the latter was identified by former President Bill Clinton as the only "dark horse that's got any kind of chance" for the GOP nomination.]

Not bad for a guy who has generally been treated as a fringe candidate whose only impact on the race would be as a punching bag for more legitimate candidates looking to score political points. For example, in one of the early Republican debates, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani attacked Paul for saying extremists "attack us because we've been over there."

Paul is far from a typical Republican presidential candidate: He has been against the war in Iraq from the outset and embraces a libertarian platform that includes dismantling the Department of Education. His support is largely Internet-based, with 70 percent of his donations coming online, according to Paul's communications director, Jesse Benton. His passionate supporters regularly bombard online news stories with comments on why Paul is the only candidate worth considering in the GOP field.

But Paul is little more than a blip on the national radar screen, coming in at just 3 percent support in a Washington Post-ABC News poll out this week. Despite his fundraising prowess, he remains a long shot to win the GOP nomination, and Huckabee dismissed Paul as "anything but" electable in an interview with CBS News this week.

"The Republicans are, frankly, divided up between nine or 10 candidates," said Huckabee. "Libertarians have one guy and they're fanatically loyal to him ... but it's not a Republican crowd, it's essentially either a Libertarian, in some cases, just an anti-war crowd."

Paul now has the money and name recognition to make an impact even if he doesn't get the Republican nomination, however. His campaign staff has grown from 10 to 40-plus over the past few months, and his team is now working on a second round of television ads. Benton says Paul had more than 30,000 donors for the quarter.

But Paul wants to do more than siphon votes from the bigger candidates in the GOP field. And if he is unable to become a legitimate candidate for the Republican nomination, he could potentially become the most serious and recognized presidential candidate in the history of the Libertarian Party.

Paul ran on the Libertarian ticket in 1988, and Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory says he is welcome to seek the party's nomination this time around. "It was fantastic to see that wide support (for Paul)," said Cory. "It's a positive sign for the Libertarian Party and for liberty in general." Cory said his party does "not want to ride Paul's coattails," but noted that he is encouraged by Paul's success. He says if Paul continues running as a Republican, he hopes "some of his integrity rubs off on his opponents."

There is a potential stumbling block to Paul jumping to the Libertarian ticket: A number of states, including Paul's home state of Texas, have "sore loser laws" that prohibit a candidate who loses in the primary of one party from appearing on the ballot with a different party in the general election. "If Paul were to seek our nomination, he'd have to make sure his name wasn't on those ballots," said Cory. "It would not disqualify him from being our candidate, but would weigh heavily on the minds of our delegates."

Paul has repeatedly said that he will not run on a third-party ticket; this week he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that "the system is so biased against a democratic process of allowing competition. You know, we can't get in the debates, it's hard to get on ballots."

Benton, Paul's communications director, echoes that sentiment.

"He has run as a third party candidate before," said Benton. "You spend half your time and two-thirds of your money just getting on the ballot. In his mind, the only type of candidate that could run a successful third party campaign would be a very, very wealthy person that could self-finance."

"You never say never, but it's 99.9999 percent," added Benton. "It's as close to absolute as possible."

[downtowner97]

I take offense to this article. It says over and over that Ron Paul is a Libertarian hiding in the Republican party. This is less true than to say that McCain is a Democrat hiding in the Republican party. The old values of the Republican party were small government, little spending, and little government involvement in our lives, and a diplomatic approach backed up by military might. Ron Paul personifies those old Republican values.

Paul is the only candidate worth considering in the entire field. He is being bought, just like any other candidate, but he''s being bought by real, individual people who love this country. We want him to represent us, not oil, not Israel, and not the weapons industry.

If you like Paul, save him some money on advertising. Put a sign in your yard, a sticker on your car, or get yourself a nice Ron Paul Tshirt. The more people know it''s ok to support him, the better his chances of winning the nomination.

[navyretired2]

Well, Dr. Paul FINALLY got a headline!!

Too bad it''s focused on how he doesn''t have a chance, instead of focusing on his great values and vision for leadership of this nation. This man is too good to be elected :(

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat. As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda. Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[glossypan]

The only "gotta be there to vote" poll in Texas this election cycle was Sept 01 2007 in Ft Worth. Only Republican party workers could vote. The top tier candidates did not participate. Ron Paul ran buses from across the state so his spporters could vote.

The tally:
Winner: Duncan Hunter (CA) 41% winner
Third: Ron Paul (TX) 17% third

Mr Pauls blog spun this as a victory. Perhaps he was influenced by the money raised a thousand dollar per guest poll-eve cocktail party. Paul has yet to translate his rabid internet support and appeal to the ultrarich into show up votes, even among Texas Republicans.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[gunownerdan]

This story is typical of what you should expect from the corporate owned and corporate controlled mass media.
If you tell the people Dr. Ron Paul doesn''t have a chance enough times, they will come to believe it.
Ron Paul has a rock-solid reputation in congress of defending the Constitution.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[gunownerdan]

Chuck373737,
Are you a Ron Paul supporter?
You don''t seem to be helping much if so.

[aeasus]

Ron Paul is awesome.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[Renegade.Rivers]

What a piece of *** article. It''s not only bogus, its slanted and bias. Dr. Ron Paul has been nearly blacklisted by the Main Stream Media (MSM)it seems. Very few portrays given by the MSM have been positive. Dr. Ron Paul has neither been given the credit he deserves for being an great American patriot, nor have they taken the time to address the issues that Dr. Ron Paul feels are so very important to the American citizenry. Moreover, many of the owning corporations that control the MSM are afraid of the consequences of Dr. Ron Paul being elected, because they know they have things to hide, and they are afraid that if Dr. Paul was elected he would reveal the truth.

Dr. Paul has always stood by and for the common citizen, not the big corporations, and the special interest groups. He has never voted for an increase in taxes. Instead he believes that government is much to large, and if cuts were made in special interest groups and government spending, then there would be no need for tax increases. He voted against the war in Iraq, and has said that if he were elected president he would bring the troops home. He also voted against the Patriot Act, saying, "The answer is obvious to those who understand that freedom cannot be exchanged for security." Which resounds of what Benjamin Franklin said, "The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either."

[nexgen99]

I am sure he is a nice person. However, he is too old, too naive and too weak an individual who appears to be living in la la land.

He thinks he can dismantle our military complex, that alone shows he is living on another planet. Their will never be a time in America where our military leadership would allow a politician to endanger the safety of this nation. Not going to happen.

[Renegade.Rivers]

One has to read and study the goals and aims of Dr. Paul, as well as the views that he has, to really appreciate him. His honesty and integrity are impeccable. He is a sincere person, worthy and capable of leading our nation at a time when our nation needs such a leader. I encourage you to consider Dr. Paul, and vote for him in your state primary.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[Renegade.Rivers]

Chuck,

I understand you may be excited about Dr. Paul, but please don''t spam the comments it looks bad for all of us who support Ron Paul. We don''t have to spam our message, it is better to say the right thing once, than to make what is said worthless by spamming it.

[dutchfarmer]

Congratulations to CBS and Ron Paul. Finally, CBS has given a little coverage to Ron Paul. He is the only candidate worthy of the coverage.

[chrisconlin]

glossypan :

i belive you missed the point. That 17% was a big deal. As you freely mentioned "only republican workers" were aloud to vote. In other words, the Texas poll was not open to the general public only former Republican delegates who had been to the previous 4 republican conventions. That 17% came from entrenched die hard Republicans (not libertiarian, or any other party affiliation). Pretty good for a main stream media marginalized candidate who is supposedly polling at around 3%.

[glossypan]

GunOwnerDan said...........
"Chuck373737,
Are you a Ron Paul supporter?
You don''''t seem to be helping much if so."

Typical of Ron Paul supporters. Toilet papering the internet with multiple posts. Skewing straw poll results with multiple votes. Burying other posters with the same messages from the same handful of supporters. If this is indicative of Paul''s respect for individuals, it is no wonder that Texas Republicans have not embraced his message.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[nexgen99]

Chuck373737..... Your starting to look like a Hillary supporter spamming everywhere

[cs4466]

GO HILLARY 2008! :) WOOHOO

[chrisconlin]

i do not believe Chuck is a ron paul supporter. but even if he is, it in no way reflects on Ron Paul himself. The fact is, is that all political candidates have passionate supporters. dr. paul''s is no diffrent. by the way, those phone polls after the debates can not be spammed. And even if they could, that would mean ALL candidate supporters could "spam" not just Dr. Paul''s.

[gmcnally2]

The fact that Ron Paul has said he will dismantle the Federal Reserve and let the government issue money, and keep the $928 Billion in American Taxpayer Dollars we currently pay to European Bankers and Chinese Billionaires in interest is reason enough to vote for him. Long Long Long overdue, when the people find out what is really going on with our money, and how banks create money from nothing and demand interest on that creation, it will be re-tooled. Watch ''Money Masters'' on Google video, it is worth the time spent for an education you cannot get in any college, all well documented facts.

[conservativ6]

I find this article to be quite humorous. I''ve been a conservative Republican all my life. Paul stands for everything traditional conservatism has always been about.

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

If anyone wonders why Huckabee made the comments he did, your answer can be found in an interview he did after the Iowa straw poll, in which he said he was the most threatened by Ron Paul. LOL

Ron Paul supporters come from all walks of life and across the entire political spectrum. People who, if not for this election, would probably have very little to do with each other. But are uniting because we all understand the need to reinstate our Constitution, the Rule of Law and individual liberty. These things are the very foundation of our country and we are letting them just slip away.

I haven''t seen anything like this happen since Reagan''s first election. Does everyone remember how Reagan was able to unite the country? Not only did conservatives and other Republicans vote for him, but so did a large number of Democrats, people from the Green party, Libertarians and every other party. This is the same thing we need today and it is what I have seen with my own eyes, with the Ron Paul Revolution. Join with us and let''s take our country back.

[mh4cbs1]

If we could only disintegrate the corrupt corporate-owned Democrat and Republican parties, we could have an election between Ron Paul (who is a Libertarian using the Republican party) and Ralph Nader (Green Party).

Both candidates KNOW the WAR IS BASED ON LIES. Both candidates want OUT of Iraq. Both want an end to the EMPIRE-BUILDING. Both decry $500 BILLION so far wasted in Iraq. Both want to dismantle the Military-Industrial-Congressional War Machine.

Then the decision can be about whether to let the filthy rich corporations get even richer and dominate our society even more (Ron Paul / Liberarians), OR we get active citizens to regain control of their democracy from the corporations, to create a sustainable economy based on social justice in a peaceful world (Nader/Greens).

[likeitis5050]

I''ve pretty much learned to just skim past zealots who post, repost, excessive post, and post regardless of topic. These zealots need to learn to reign in their passion. It is possible to be so heavenly bound you''re no earthly good, as in: you are turning people off because you only have one thing to say. Get a clue. Ron could very well be the man of the hour but his ''apostles'' are ruining any chance that his message will reach intended targets. Social skills do count, and the zealots seriously lack in this area.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[robertkjjj]

Ron Paul, the "Barney Fife" of the Republicans. This guy embodies virtually every single quality that Republicans despise: whiny, wimpy, feminine, weak, fragile, appeasing, self-hating, American-hating, gay-like, liberal, and just downright overall ANNOYING. So, it''s no wonder his supporters are exactly the same way. Until now, I never realized there was this closet fringe of the GOP, a million wimps strong, just waiting for a freak loser like Ron Paul to appear.

[mh4cbs1]

Chuck: When I said that Ron Paul was using the Republican Party... there is nothing wrong with it. The Republicans and Democrats have rigged the system with ballot access laws that make it almost impossible to run as a 3rd party candidate unless you are a billionaire like Ross Perot.

[pollroller1]

You know what? The more I hear about Ron Paul, the more I like him and I''m a Democrat. If he runs for president, I will vote for him.

[nexgen99]

What would you rather have a giant military industrial complex employing millions of Americans or a giant welfare state burdening the middle class by creating a whole new population of socially dependent slackers.
I take the lesser of two evils, the employment of millions of Americans.

[mh4cbs1]

roberkjj:
I guess you like the macho cowboy War President types.

No wimpy candidates for you!!

No draftdodging chicken-hawks for you!

No one that would abuse middle-class troops as cannon fodder while sitting back and giving tax cuts to the rich so that their kids can go to private colleges instead of volunteering in the military to pay for tuition. That would be too cowardly for you!

Yes, "bring ''em on!", "mission accomplished", "we''re kickin'' *** in Iraq"

We''re so tough we can start a War with our Lies. 3,800 Dead troops - now thats a fight! A few hundred thousands dead Iraqis, cities in ruins. WE''RE TOUGH GUYS! No Wimps for Us!

You are as sick as the pathetic draft-dodging cowards that got us into this needless DISASTER of death and destruction.

[chrisconlin]

Robertk :
All of your comments were observations of outward appearances. Is this the only thing you look for when choosing a President? start looking at the message that each candidate speaks. You will quickly realize that there is very little diffrence between canidates OF EITHER PARTY except for a couple. All advocate bigger govt. (voicing the call for "lower taxes" on the Republican side does not equal reduction of govt.) Ron Paul is the lone exception.

[mh4cbs1]

nexgen:

You finally show your wisdom. Lets put people to work making products that help our society prosper. We can all benefit from the production of missiles and cluster bombs. Who needs good highways, bridges, rail systems, levees -- so boring! Who needs new alternative energy technology and products? Who needs health care?

Yes lets put America to work building weapons since our corporations have outsourced all the rest of the jobs. Brilliant solution!

(don''t you ever get tired of being the fool)

[chrisconlin]

"What would you rather have a giant military industrial complex employing millions of Americans or a giant welfare state burdening the middle class by creating a whole new population of socially dependent slackers.
I take the lesser of two evils, the employment of millions of Americans."
___________________________________________

You present a false dilema. There are more than 2 options. A 3rd would be to actually return to a free-market with limited govt. interference and allow the free market to dictate who gets employed where. Besides, i do not believe you can not have one of the choices you present without the other. Both advocate a philosophy that big government is the solution. if we have rep. that believe in big government, the war fare wel-fare stste is what will result. In addition, what you advocate is not that diffrent than a wel-fare state since you believe it is the gov. that should provide jobs( benifits) to the unemployed!

[superkon]

A few words to robertkjjj...Ron Paul and his supporters are anything but weak. It takes a million times more balls to use diplomacy instead of attacking others out of fear. In the words of Leo Roskin, ''It is the weak who are cruel. Gentleness can only be expected from the strong.'' In all the Ron Paul videos I have seen (a lot), I''ve never seen him degenerate to the baseless attacks that other candidates employ. That fact alone makes him an admirable candidate.

[nexgen99]

(don''''t you ever get tired of being the fool)

Posted by mh4cbs1 at 10:34 AM : Oct 06, 2007
------------------------------------------
No, but I get tired of listening to you make an a.s.s of yourself. Deal with the reality of the situation for once and come back from la la land.

Your euphoric dream of the perfect world will never happen so work with with what you have and maybe not in your lifetime but someday some of your goals will be achieved.

[prinzowhales]

Well Democrats, you can count on one thing--if Ron Paul doesn''t win the nomination and isn''t going to run as a Third Party candidate--unless you nominate Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel, you are going to have a big fat antiwar Third Party that is going to run a real antiwar candidate against your mainstream scum and the Republicans'' mainstream scum--so, unless you get busy and nominate an antiwar candidate, you are going to get a replay of 2000 and 2004--because people with principles WILL NOT VOTE FOR THE LIKES OF GORE OR KERRY, AND THEY CERTAINLY WON''T VOTE WHAT THE CAT COUGHS UP AT THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION IF PAUL DOESN''T GET THE NOD.

The best thing that the independents and Democrats can do to help this country restore a Constitutional Republic, is to register as Republicans and vote for Ron Paul in the primaries....that way, when the Democratic leadership betrays you--as they did on Iraq after the 2006 elections, you''ll have a Republican that all Americans can depend on to do the right thing come ''ell or high water--RON PAUL!

[downtowner97]

Bush and Pelosi completely agree on border security. Let ''em all through and give them citizenship. Never mind whether they''re wanted criminals in their country, or whether some Saudi terrorists put on cheap cowboy hats and Wal Mart jeans and run through with ''em. Ron Paul says he''d protect our borders, and that if you don''t have well-protected borders, you don''t have a sovereign country. How chicken is that?

If we don''t start treating our borders like borders, this is what you''re going to hear when you call the phone company: "Para continuar en espanol, marque uno. Para Ingles, marque dos."

[mh4cbs1]

big government -- little government

The main issue is not SIZE but QUALITY. The problem is that our government is no longer "of the people". It is run by corporations and lobbyists who write the laws.

The problem with Libertarians is that they turn over all decision making to those with the most economic power -- the result is that we have more harmful products, a worse environment, laws that enrich the rich (they write them)...

It is not the 1800''s we live in a complex interdependent society. Citizens must RULE.

If Libertarians had been in power since the 50''s we''d have no seat belts, we''d be choking in the smog, over-development sprawl would be even more haphazard, ugly, traffic jammed than it already is (though developers usually get their way with corrupt politicians).

CITIZENS need to be informed, active and involved. If they were, then the "size" of government will end up being the about the right size.

[downtowner97]

Nexgen99 says "Work with what you have."

Wouldn''t it be great if you could go back in time to the continental congress and tell the founding fathers "Work with what you have." You, sir, are a defeatist wimp.

[chuck373737]

This notion that Paul is lurking in the Republican party and draws most of his support from Libertarians is simply untrue. I have a large circle of coworkers who are all very enthusiastic about Paul. They all normally vote straight party Republican in elections. The difference here is that everyone will be voting FOR Paul in this case as opposed to AGAINST the Democrat.

As a Republican myself I can say that Paul is what I''ve always wanted to see from my party, and is actually what the party always claimed to be. Unlike most Libertarians, Paul is more of a Constitutionalist and social conservative. He is pro-life and wants to enforce our national borders. These are not typical Libertarian positions. Libertarians rightly support him because he won''t push his social conservatism from Washington, preferring to leave most of the decisions to the states. Social conservatives support him because they know he won''t roll over to any agenda.

Ron Paul is unique. He''s the first, and unfortunately probably the last politician I''ll ever send my money to support.

[cfin5]

Here''s the man that we need as President! He''s better than John F. Kennedy. I have never seen a candidate that is bringing more Democrats and Republicans together in being Americans than him. Even the Constitution Party likes him because of his voting record. If he''s not nominated by the republicans, I see him running clear to the finish line on the Constitution ticket.....Check out (constitutionparty.com) for voting records and more information......Ron Paul, the unsocialist in ''08!

[mh4cbs1]

nexgen: sounds like you''ve given up on America. Your only solution is to turn our nation over to a bunch of fascist cowards so they can run us into the ground.