MINNEAPOLIS, Sept. 2, 2008

Ron Paul’s Counter Convention

CBSNews.com Reports: As Republicans Gathered At The RNC In Minnesota, The Faithful Rallied Around Their Own Saint Paul

  • Ron Paul supporters outside the Photo

    Ron Paul supporters outside the "Rally For The Republic," Minneapolis, Minnesota, Sept. 2, 2008.  (CBS/Brian Montopoli)

  • In-Depth GOP Convention Center

    Latest news and video from the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn.

  • Photos Convention Clicks

    Snapshots from the podium, the floor and host cities.

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

It was, Ron Paul allows, “a bit of a slight.”

Until this year, the longtime Texas Congressman and former presidential candidate has had no problem getting floor passes to the Republican National Convention. This time around, he said, all he could get was a “second class” pass. He was only allowed on the convention floor, he was told, with a chaperone; he could bring no staff with him; and when he left the hall, his credentials would be taken away.

As for a speaking slot - something traditionally offered to candidates who garnered support during the presidential primary - Paul said simply, “that wasn’t available to us.”

Not that Paul didn’t have other plans. On Tuesday, as Republican delegates gathered for the second night of the RNC in St. Paul, the Libertarian-leaning congressman was holding court at the Target Center in nearby Minneapolis, the 15,000-plus capacity home of the Minnesota Timberwolves. The Paul faithful had gathered in Minneapolis for the “Rally For The Republic,” an effort to call the GOP “back to its roots.”

“I would only travel for him or my immediate family,” said Nancy Zverev, who had come to Minneapolis from Poughkeepsie, New York. “Ron Paul cured my apathy.”

Paul’s platform revolves around limited government, fiscal responsibility, and protection of individual liberties; he opposes the war in Iraq, wants the Patriot Act repealed, and says parents should be allowed to decide on how their children are schooled. At a morning press conference, Paul said he organized the rally “to satisfy the enthusiasm that was built for the message” during the Republican primary, when he attracted a relatively small but extremely fervent following of supporters disenchanted with the current Republican Party.

Many of those supporters are young men. Seventeen-year-old Conor Deloach, who traveled to the rally from Washington DC, said he wanted to see Republicans return to Constitutional ideals.

“The economic stimulus checks, I thought it was ridiculous,” said Deloach. “And the Republican Party came up with that idea?”

The John McCain campaign has reportedly been in talks with Paul for his backing; the campaign does not want Paul’s supporters, who showed unprecedented fundraising prowess during the GOP primaries, to line up behind Bob Barr, the former Georgia Congressman and current Libertarian presidential candidate. (Paul’s fundraising list, the Washington Times reports, runs to 180,000 people.)

At his press conference Tuesday, Paul said he didn’t “foresee giving any marching orders to the supporters.” He had kind words for Barr and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin, and said he was not urging his delegates to back McCain.

Rick Michael, a history teacher from Virginia, is both a Paul supporter and an RNC delegate. He said he would support the Republican nominee in the general election - though, he noted, McCain’s selection of his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, “made it a lot easier to do that.”

Michael’s first allegiance, however, was clearly to the man he supported in the primary.

“If you look at what he said in 1988, it’s the same thing today as it was back then,” Michael said of Paul. “And there are so few politicians that are like that.”

Springfield, Missouri’s Charity Davis brought her four small children to the rally dressed in Colonial-era garb in an effort to illustrate her support for Paul’s call to a return to Constitutional ideals.

“We’re a very Constitutional family,” Davis said. “We home school our kids. The Constitution’s a part of our curriculum.” Davis, a self-described lifelong Republican, said she hadn’t decided who to support in November. What she did know, she said, was that it wouldn’t be McCain or Democratic nominee Barack Obama.

Political commentator Tucker Carlson, who introduced the event, said before he went onstage that he was drawn to Paul in part because of the congressman’s willingness to support other people’s choices even if he does not agree with them. Carlson pointed to Paul’s backing of responsible marijuana use - despite his personal avoidance of the drug - as an example.

“I just felt like, you know, I truly admire that,” Carlson said.

The Paul faithful became most enthusiastic when speakers railed against those things that many in the Libertarian-leaning crowd opposed, some of them obscure: The Lisbon Agreement, the North American Union, a National ID Card. (The last prompted cheers of “No ID.”) When the Constitution Party’s Howard Phillips mentioned ending US involvement in the United Nations, he got a huge cheer from the crowd; when he lauded Paul’s proposal to abolish the Federal Reserve, he got an even bigger one.

Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura was one of the featured speakers at the rally; he got an enthusiastic response with a defense of the second amendment based on the notion that it is needed so that “if the government gets out of control…we have the ability to rise up and change it.” When Ventura questioned why Osama bin Laden has not been charged in the 9/11 attacks, some in the crowd chanted “inside job.”

Shortly before Paul went onstage, members of the audience were told there were about 500 seats newly available on the Target Center floor because the RNC delegates who had been in attendance had to go over to the Xcel center; at the Xcel center, meanwhile, floor organizers said their biggest task that evening was to keep Paul’s supporters from making a ruckus during speeches from more mainstream Republicans.

When Paul appeared at the podium after a long day of speakers, he was greeted with rapturous applause from the faithful; near the start of his remarks, he noted that he had said during the primary campaign that he wanted to be president because he didn’t want to run people’s lives, run the economy, or run the world.

“They said that sounds like a weak president,” he said. “I said, ‘well, I don’t think so.’”

“There’s an urgency in what we do, because we are carrying the banner, and we must act,” Paul said later, not long after his mention of the RNC prompted boos. “Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it.”

“An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government,” he added.

At the morning press conference, Paul addressed the lingering question of the day: Whether Tuesday’s rally marked the culmination of a brief, if passionate, movement, or if it would ultimately be seen as one milestone in an effort that would last long after the 2008 campaign.

“If we’re worth our salt, and the philosophy is worth anything, and we are truly talking about revolutionary changes, this momentum will continue,” Paul said, “and we have a greater presence and a greater voice, not only in the Republican Party but in the policies of this country.”

By Brian Montopoli
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Candidate Profiles & RSS Feeds


Video and Galleries from Politics

Add a Comment See all 90 Comments
by callurfears September 3, 2008 2:16 AM EDT
I''m curious. If 10,000 Hillary supporters rallied at the DNC, the story would have been #1 for days and every hour. Why is this story buried?

I guess the media does not want to step on McCain''s propaganda. They are, after all, his "BASE", as he likes to call the media.
Reply to this comment
by wardoglrs September 3, 2008 2:41 AM EDT
Gee CBS are sick today?. Thank you Brian Montopoli for the fair and honsest work you have done. But this is CBS so it is not to be trusted. But with people like Brian Montopoli I can see some hope.

It was a night meeting:
somewhere in a troubled land.
They came with no greeting;
left without a shaken hand.

Nearby the town sleeping
was unaware of what was done.
No need for watchkeeping,
they''''ll be gone before the sun.

You may not see just where the sense is
in the actions of the State.
You may not know the consequencses
of their actions till too late.
The rival factions still debate
as shadows gather at your gate.

It was a night meeting:
independent, prearranged,
to get a signed treaty,
force the government to change.

Secret diplomacy without the means to make their policy prevail.
Meanwhile the powers that be behind the scenes have guaranteed to see
them fail.

You seem beyond the jurisdiction
of the democratic powers.
You do not see the contradiction
of the watchmen in the towers,
you turn your back as night devours
the final chance, the final hours.

It was a night meeting:
these are men who won''''t be missed.
Their lives were just fleeting:
they don''''t offically exist.
Reply to this comment
by zhynaryll September 3, 2008 3:18 AM EDT
Paul has some good ideas, and some useless ones - just like most politicians. However, I believe that his good ones are better than the other 2 parties combined. Love him or hate him - he does say what he means and means what he says. And that''s saying a lot when compared to other politicians given much more media coverage and puffing. Read what he says!
Reply to this comment
by blackyowe September 3, 2008 3:34 AM EDT
I am a Democrat and the man makes good sense to me even! God Bless this man he has guts!
Reply to this comment
by bud28dy September 3, 2008 3:50 AM EDT
I understand that Paul charged his supporters to get into his little pretend "convention." LOL. You got to hand it to this old geezer. He took unspent millions from them during the election and apparently he isn''t done yet. A Paul supporter and his money are soon parted.
Reply to this comment
by xtrabiggg September 3, 2008 4:31 AM EDT
''kOOL-aID'' dRINKERS? ''cRACKPOTS''? It''s telling that many of those who oppose Ron Paul cannot defend their position by questioning facts and positions, but instead rely on that tried and true propaganda tool- the ''ad hominem'' attack. If you don''t know what that is, just google ''Herman Goering'' or ''Josef Goebbels''. They were both masters of the ''art'' of propaganda. Seems as if their are now many devotees of that ''art'' in both the media and the current power structure in this country!

Ron Paul talks seriously about the Iraq War, the Deficit, Inflation and personal liberties. When was the last time EITHER of the Candidates of the MONEY party- McCain or Obama had the guts or even the intellectual fortitude to even mention these topics? These topics always were and continue to be the top polled topics that voters are concerned about. But all we get are platitudes, glittering generalities and ad-hominem attacks.

Welcome to Brave New World of American politics. It would be disappointing if it weren''t so disheartening and disgusting.

xtrabiggg
+
Reply to this comment
by dewbug2 September 3, 2008 4:32 AM EDT
Good post, voltaire777....I really like McWhat''s-his-name''s "BASE" as he calls the news media.....I think it is an acronym for "BULLSH## ARTISTS SCAMMING EVERYONE".
As for the twit who says Ron Paul took money from his supporters, which one of the others did not?????who paid the little muslim''s bill to paint his rented jetplane with the muslim symbol and all that other garbage about "change"....(not to mention the rent on the plane used to carry his lying butt all over the place to scam more people than anyone else has to date)....is he talking about the "change" he scammed a lot of dummies out of???? what about old Wicked *itch of the Beltway....did she fleece anyone???? naaaawwww...... she and old O''Bammy are gonna give it alllll back!when pigs fly.....oooops! she had a plane, too, didn''t she????
Reply to this comment
by ausus-2009 September 3, 2008 4:39 AM EDT
The only Republican traditions Ron Paul represents are those of Senators Borah, Lodge senior and the pre-World War II Bob Taft. These and others like them were isolationists whose actions allowed Hitler to build up his forces and invade his neighbors. That type of isolationism went out with Pearl Harbor. Paul must have missed 9/11.
Reply to this comment
by georgeeeeeee September 3, 2008 4:50 AM EDT
%u201CHi ya%u2019ll, G. W. here! Me and Laura just got back from another vacation at the ranch, I wanted to stay a lot longer so I could clear up some of that dang brush and ride round on that two-wheel thingy but D!ck said it%u2019d look bad if I wasn%u2019t in that Louis place down yonder. I dunno, something bout one of them swirly things maken a fuss again. Heck, last time I sent Browny down there and D!ck let me stay on the ranch so me and Barney could wrestle. He did a heckuva job, so I dunno, maybe I culd just call and rustle him outa bed and send him on down there again so I don%u2019t have to cut short my putting in the basement. Just a crying shame ain%u2019t it? Well D!ck told me I gotta get up in front of the camera here in my west-wing and tell ya%u2019ll bout my good friend John McCain and that lovely slice he plucked from up in that frozen place. Heck, what can I say McCainiac, I luv ya brother, now I know ya told me to quit callin you that but you know how I am ole%u2019 buddy, if you ain%u2019t got a nickname, it just ain%u2019t the same now is it? hehehe. I wanted to tell you how proud I am of you McCainiac, that%u2019s just some real fine strategery there in your V.P. pick. I mean come on now, a gun-toting, god fearin cowgirl who is bff%u2019s with our pals over at Exxon. To tell you truth it kinda brings a tear to my eye she reminds me of myself so much. Well, I%u2019ll catch ya%u2019ll later. Hook em Horns!%u201D
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:01 AM EDT
I don''t understand ... why is it so difficult to understand the clear difference between Isolationism and Non-Intervention? Do we need to break it down to you Sesame-Street style? Yes, Isolationism has lead to WW2 in the past. But intervention, not isolation, leads to CIA puppets like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and the Shah in Iran. Can you imagine what you would do if Iran came to our country, assassinated our President, installed a dictator, and then took our resources?

Seriously have you lost your mind? The only Isolationists are the War-Mongering Fools and their war-fever mongrels who continue to isolate us by supporting murderous and foolish policies that lead us to be more resented in the world. Such as Sanctions on Iraq which only made his rule stronger.

Ron Paul didn''t miss 9/11. You did.
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:02 AM EDT
I don''t understand ... why is it so difficult to understand the clear difference between Isolationism and Non-Intervention? Do we need to break it down to you Sesame-Street style? Yes, Isolationism has lead to WW2 in the past. But intervention, not isolation, leads to CIA puppets like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and the Shah in Iran. Can you imagine what you would do if Iran came to our country, assassinated our President, installed a dictator, and then took our resources?

Seriously have you lost your mind? The only Isolationists are the War-Mongering Fools and their war-fever mongrels who continue to isolate us by supporting murderous and foolish policies that lead us to be more resented in the world. Such as Sanctions on Iraq which only made his rule stronger.

Ron Paul didn''t miss 9/11. You did.
Reply to this comment
by ausus-2009 September 3, 2008 5:06 AM EDT
georgeeeeeee,

Your attempt at humor or whatever it was didn''t work because you created it as a one-paragraph rant.

Breaking up the paragraphs would have made it more readable.
Reply to this comment
by muggsman1 September 3, 2008 5:07 AM EDT
This country is starting to wake up and realize that we can%u2019t continue down the same path the republicans and democrats have been leading us. I%u2019m excited that more people are hearing Ron Paul%u2019s message of freedom and personal responsibility and I think we will finally start to see some change, real change, in our government and in the next election cycle.
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:08 AM EDT
I don''t understand ... why is it so difficult to understand the clear difference between Isolationism and Non-Intervention? Do we need to break it down to you Sesame-Street style? Yes, Isolationism has lead to WW2 in the past. But intervention, not isolation, leads to CIA puppets like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and the Shah in Iran. Can you imagine what you would do if Iran came to our country, assassinated our President, installed a dictator, and then took our resources?

Seriously have you lost your mind? The only Isolationists are the War-Mongering Fools and their war-fever mongrels who continue to isolate us by supporting murderous and foolish policies that lead us to be more resented in the world. Such as Sanctions on Iraq which only made his rule stronger.

Ron Paul didn''t miss 9/11. You did. Ausus. Please use your brain.
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:10 AM EDT
I don''t understand ... why is it so difficult to understand the clear difference between Isolationism and Non-Intervention? Do we need to break it down to you Sesame-Street style? Yes, Isolationism has lead to WW2 in the past. But intervention, not isolation, leads to CIA puppets like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and the Shah in Iran. Can you imagine what you would do if Iran came to our country, assassinated our President, installed a dictator, and then took our resources?

Seriously have you lost your mind? The only Isolationists are the War-Mongering Fools and their war-fever mongrels who continue to isolate us by supporting murderous and foolish policies that lead us to be more resented in the world. Such as Sanctions on Iraq which only made his rule stronger.

Ron Paul didn''t miss 9/11. You did. Ausus. Please use your brain.
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:11 AM EDT
I don''t understand ... why is it so difficult to understand the clear difference between Isolationism and Non-Intervention? Do we need to break it down to you Sesame-Street style? Yes, Isolationism has lead to WW2 in the past. But intervention, not isolation, leads to CIA puppets like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and the Shah in Iran. Can you imagine what you would do if Iran came to our country, assassinated our President, installed a dictator, and then took our resources?

Seriously have you lost your mind? The only Isolationists are the War-Mongering Fools and their war-fever mongrels who continue to isolate us by supporting murderous and foolish policies that lead us to be more resented in the world. Such as Sanctions on Iraq which only made his rule stronger.

Ron Paul didn''t miss 9/11. You did. Ausus. Please use your brain.
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:17 AM EDT
I don''t understand ... why is it so difficult to understand the clear difference between Isolationism and Non-Intervention? Do we need to break it down to you Sesame-Street style? Yes, Isolationism has lead to WW2 in the past. But intervention, not isolation, leads to CIA puppets like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and the Shah in Iran. Can you imagine what you would do if Iran came to our country, assassinated our President, installed a dictator, and then took our resources?

Seriously have you lost your mind? The only Isolationists are the War-Mongering Fools and their war-fever mongrels who continue to isolate us by supporting murderous and foolish policies that lead us to be more resented in the world. Such as Sanctions on Iraq which only made his rule stronger.

Ron Paul didn''t miss 9/11. You did. Ausus. Please use your brain.
Reply to this comment
by ausus-2009 September 3, 2008 5:22 AM EDT
Deadwind,

Saddam was a dictator, Hitler was a dictator; Saddam invaded his neighbors, Hitler invaded his neighbors; Saddam attempted to exterminate a race he did not like within his borders, Hitler attempted to exterminate a race he did not like within his borders; Saddam toyed with WMD (in case you forgot Israel bombed his nuclear facilities}, Hitler toyed with WMD; Saddam used poison gas, Hitler used poison gas. I hope even you might have noticed some parallels.

On the subject of assassinating a foreign leader, Saddam was executed by Iraqis after being tried by an Iraqi court. The case of a US government assassinating a foreign leader that comes to my mind is Ngo Dinh Diem, who was killed under the Kennedy administration.

Whether it was isolation or non-intervention, the US did nothing to stop Hitler until after Pearl Harbor and millions paid the price.
Reply to this comment
by olderthnadam September 3, 2008 5:24 AM EDT
God bless Ron Paul for speaking the truth and sticking to the real issues. Anytime the nominees of either of the two major parties are asked where they stand on any issue their response is to tell you where their opponent stands on the issue rather then where they do. Character assassination is the name of the game and taking a stand on the issue only gives them something they might actually have to live up to. Voting for your appointed leaders only serves legitimize them and their corporate bosses.
Reply to this comment
by deadwind September 3, 2008 5:36 AM EDT
Like I said with no counter argument, our GOVERNMENT assassinated the democratically elected leader of Iran, installed the Shah, and proceeded to take the oil.

Saddam attacked his neighbor because our government enabled him, providing the gas. The killing started when the CIA gave him names of leftist intellectuals in his country.

Could we please drop the Hitler conversation? I already know what Isolationism does. We can''t keep propping up dictators and coming in like knights in shining armor to take out those dictators (Saddam/Bin Laden).

Reply to this comment
by ausus-2009 September 3, 2008 5:51 AM EDT
Deadwind,

The government of Iran was overthrown by the Shah in 1925, at the height of America''s isolation (Keep cool with Coolidge). His son, the last Shah, was installed by the UK and USSR. If you are talking about Mohammad Mosaddeq, he was imprisoned by the Shah and died in prison. He was not assassinated. The Shah was head of state from 1941 until he was deposed and imprisoned. Mosaddeq was only Prime Minister.

If you wish to believe something else, go ahead.
Reply to this comment
by longtree-2009 September 3, 2008 6:40 AM EDT
Ron Paul is wasting everyone''s time and money. Either Obama or McCain will be elected as the next POTUS. He should throw his support, and money, behind one of the two major candidates.
Reply to this comment
by merlgrey September 3, 2008 7:12 AM EDT
the problem dr paul faced was a real man speaking the truth to real people in an intellectual and intelligent manner is an immediate disqualifier to the establishment. freedom has been replaced with fear.



Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 September 3, 2008 8:50 AM EDT
To Ausus

For Iran, the CIA%u2019s role became well-known, and caused controversy within the organization itself, and within the CIA congressional hearings of the 1970s. CIA supporters maintain that the plot against Mosaddeq was strategically necessary, and praise the efficiency of agents in carrying out the plan. Critics say the scheme was paranoid and colonial, as well as immoral."

Sound familiar? (cough Saddam cough)

"In March 2000, then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated her regret that Mosaddeq was ousted: "The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran%u2019s political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America." In the same year, the New York Times published a detailed report about the coup based on CIA documents."
Reply to this comment
by caliengineer September 3, 2008 8:50 AM EDT
Quote: Ron Paul is wasting everyone''''s time and money. Either Obama or McCain will be elected as the next POTUS. He should throw his support, and money, behind one of the two major candidates.

Response: Way to tout the Satanist party line! Only vote for one of ours, they say, or your vote will be wasted.

Imagine it is Judgment Day. You are asked by God what motivated you in your voting decisions. What do you say?
Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 September 3, 2008 8:53 AM EDT
"Mosaddeq was only Prime Minister." Posted by ausus

Prime Minister is the head of State in most countries that have them. If he wasn''t, the CIA would then have felt no need to depose him.
Reply to this comment
by thirty3na3rd September 3, 2008 9:17 AM EDT
Jeez, after a campaign of expert yellow journalism articles against Ron Paul, finally (pretty much too late) one that actually reads like a responsible report of the facts. Great article, Brian. It''s too bad CBSnews.com had to be so irresponsible in its reporting during the prior 18 months. My TV has been avoiding CBS News and this is the only visit I''ve paid to CBSnews.com in the past 6 months.
Reply to this comment
by jmurrieta1 September 3, 2008 10:38 AM EDT
What''s really amusing is how the Republican party has censored Ron Paul like a bunch of Stalin''s Communists at a party convention would have censored Trotsky!

Then the Repugs get a lip-stick Ron Paul as their VP, only she''s nowhere near as smart, and nowhere near as experienced, as Paul.

Ron Paul is going to be a big problem for the Repugs in November. Why vote for McCain to get Palin, when you can vote for the real thing?
Reply to this comment
by navyretired2 September 3, 2008 10:45 AM EDT
Ron Paul is the ONLY decent candidate for President. NO politician is 100% perfect on policies, but this man is closer than everybody else. The problem is, so man citizens have lost track of what "America" is, that they can''t recognize what''s good for it...just what''s good in front of a camera.

We fail, as a country, limiting ourselves to McCane and Obama...total failure.

America will continue to fall as an influential player on the world''s economic and political stages, no matter which of these two morons gets elected.
Reply to this comment
by trrrorislamc September 3, 2008 11:11 AM EDT
BOUNCE HUSSEIN BOUNCE

hahaha

McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2071565/posts
Reply to this comment
by caddillackid September 3, 2008 11:17 AM EDT
I just want to comment on some of the harsh tones being taken toward CBS news. Before you knock CBS for being to democratic or Bias toward republicans, FOX news is the biggest right-hand-man type network for the republicans, for the republicans, by the republicans. I''ll get my news from anywhere else...CBS suits me just fine...stopped watching Fox news years ago, me and numerous friends of mine. So if you think CBS is too bias, turn to fox....I guess every party has it''s network that caters to them, maybe then you republicans will hear the Bush catering that you love so much!
Reply to this comment
by drinuk September 3, 2008 11:23 AM EDT
Sadly Paul is not only fighting his own party but Corporate America too. My belief however is that this genuine guy has set in motion something very exciting and will in the not too distant future take our country back from the crooks who at present have the control and I include both political parties. Both are in bed with the lobby, both serve only vested interests and neither give a dam for the people, save the sucking up at election time.

Ron Paul is worthy of the support of all the America people, he is the only one who truly respects his Employers, the Flag and the Constitution.

Sadly we blew it again !
Reply to this comment
by caddillackid September 3, 2008 11:31 AM EDT
Palin is a joke...since McCain can''t get elected with who he really wants for his VP, he decides to put this unheard-of puppet Palin on his ticket so at some point after the election (if he''d actually win, which he wont), the republicans will politely have her step aside, they will state this is for family reasons, that is the whole purpose of selecting a women with 5 children and 1 grandchild may-as-well say. It will be a noble exit strategy in their eyes, to have her leave the office for "family reasons", then McCain can have who he really wants as his VP. I hope women are not fooled by the Palin puppet. Typical of repulicans, just hope atleast 1 replublican is smart enough to see through this (though I would''nt bank on it). The smartest republicans I know have already switched to the democratic party. Please believe..Palin is a HOAX!!!
Reply to this comment
by drinuk September 3, 2008 11:44 AM EDT
LongTree, Why on earth would Ron Paul throw his money and support behind the current candidates ? During the last two years, they and their media buddies have gone out of their way to bury his honest and genuine campaign. More importantly, by there actions against Paul they have left us the people with a very poor choice which in effect offers No Choice. They have prevented the nation from having a real choice and the opportunity of electing a man all Americans would in time have been very proud of.

As a result it will be more of the same and I include Obama in my comments, more crooked lobbying, more vested interests and more hardship for the people of this nation. Yes this article is good BUT too little too late CBS.

We have become so susceptical to hype, we no longer understand the word INTEGRITY and without it we will fail as a nation.
Reply to this comment
by September 3, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
I did not support Ron Paul and would not. However, his treatment by the Republican Party is evidence of how it''s demise as a legitimate political platform in the Lincoln tradition. If the message of Sarah Palin can be heard within the Republican Party, there is no justification whatsoever for the silencing of Ron Paul. If this is why John McCain went to Vietnam, killed in the name of America and suffered extended prisoner of war status, it was a wasted effort.
Reply to this comment
by docpeter-2009 September 3, 2008 11:57 AM EDT
Was it me or did anyone else notice this: As the camrea panned around the delegates at the RNC there weren''t very many "minorities" present. Mostly a bunch of white people, not at all like the DNC. Was it CBS intentionally not showing minorities, or does the RNC represent mostly white America?

Of course we allknow the answer, I think.
Reply to this comment
by macamaca-2009 September 3, 2008 12:02 PM EDT
not at all like the DNC. Was it CBS intentionally not showing minorities, or does the RNC represent mostly white America?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________


blacks less then 13% of America''s population
blacks more then 80% of DNC population


whites 99% of the RNC population

A good reason to vote for Johnny Mc
Reply to this comment
by fsw3 September 3, 2008 12:23 PM EDT
Macamaca, if there is anything absolutely necessary in our society is to get African-Americans fully ingrained into our society. I think having an African-American as president, especially with his ''funny name'' and experience with other nations, will go a long way towards that. I keep getting counseled that we ought to put race behind us and then the likes of you keep bringing it up. This country is changing and none of us can stop it. We need to preserve what is good about us, throw out what is worse and move forward. Worrying about being ninety-nine percent white is ridiculous.
Reply to this comment
by xmanborg September 3, 2008 12:28 PM EDT
I just dont know what to think about Ron Paul.

His mother must have been REETarded because she have him 2 first names that all I know.
Reply to this comment
by fldave1 September 3, 2008 12:29 PM EDT
$10,000,000,000,000 debt - Military presence in 140 countries - preemptive wars - peaceful protesters manhandled and arrested - hard working lower to middle income Americans paying up to 50% in various taxes. Wake up people. This isn''t a Democrat/Republican issue. It has been Democrat/Republican that has caused all of the above. Start voting your conscience and pro-American rather than bipartisan. Either of the two media picked candidates will continue to lead us down the path of destruction. Vote Chuck Baldwin in 08. Thanks for this reasonable article, CBS, but this is too little too late.
Reply to this comment
by macusweil September 3, 2008 12:44 PM EDT
This is the true Republican convention.

The other faux gathering in St Paul is just a flashy media show. It''s a circus put together for the free spending cowards who have usurped the Republican party, our very government and the American way of life.

Real GOP would never have doubled the national deficit increasing taxes on the next generation or authorized preemptive warfare in Iraq.

For shame!
Reply to this comment
by mcvet-1 September 3, 2008 12:45 PM EDT
I just dont know what to think about Ron Paul.

His mother must have been REETarded because she have him 2 first names that all I know.

Posted by XmanBorg at 09:28 AM : Sep 03, 2008

Now folks THIS is a full blown Fascist in the mold of George Worst Bush! Out of ALL that was said, all the points made in this article this losers who gave us the WORST in our History decided to attack Paul''s NAME! Man YOU get the SEIG HEIL of the day. The THIRD REICH couldn''t have done any better!!
Reply to this comment
by macusweil September 3, 2008 12:47 PM EDT
"there is no justification whatsoever for the silencing of Ron Paul. If this is why John McCain went to Vietnam, killed in the name of America and suffered extended prisoner of war status, it was a wasted effort." ~Posted by menmotoscutr

Amen.
Reply to this comment
by mcvet-1 September 3, 2008 12:48 PM EDT
EVERYONE should LOOK at the Party that toss this good man aside for Liberman. All of you who want to see a party in decline, a party that can only pretend to represent this nation now.. that is what you will see on that Convention Floor. That Floor no more Represents the people of this nation than it would if it took place in ANOTHER nation. The Republican Party has been taken over by hard line Fascist and is dying a slow death. THE only way their candidate has to win is to run away from them and their leader. NOTHING more needs to be said!!
Reply to this comment
by mcvet-1 September 3, 2008 12:50 PM EDT
blacks less then 13% of America''''s population
blacks more then 80% of DNC population


whites 99% of the RNC population

A good reason to vote for Johnny Mc

Posted by macamaca at 09:02 AM : Sep 03, 2008

You do know just about EVERY High School offers Night Classes don''t you? 6th grade tops!! This Knuckle Dragging Trailer Dweller can''t exceed that limit at all! It''s embarrassing to see people living in this nation with THIS little education..
Reply to this comment
by aldon61 September 3, 2008 1:12 PM EDT
blacks less then 13% of America''''''''s population
blacks more then 80% of DNC population


whites 99% of the RNC population

A good reason to vote for Johnny Mc

Posted by macamaca at 09:02 AM : Sep 03, 2008

MCVet said it well, but people like you should not be alllowed to vote; you defy the very principals that our country was founded on. Your bigotry is astounding!
Reply to this comment
by logicrulez September 3, 2008 1:20 PM EDT
JUST WHAT WE NEED, A NUTJOB THAT YEARNS FOR THE END OF THE WORLD, SEES WAR AS GOD''S COMMAND, AND WITH ACCESS TO THE NATION''S NUCLEAR TRIGGERS. IF YOU PEOPLE ARE THAT STUPID TO VOTE FOR WW3 AND A NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST THEN YOU ARE BEYOND HELP!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE, YOU ARE VOTING IN A WACKO WITH A GLOBAL DEATH WISH!!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html

QUOTES FROM HER PASTOR:
Jesus called us to die. You''re worried about getting hurt? He''s called us to die. Listen, you know we can''t even follow him unless you are willing to give up your life. ... I believe that Jesus himself operated from that position of war mode. Everyone say "war mode."

Kalnins has preached that the 9/11 attacks and the invasion of Iraq were part of a "world war" over the Christian faith, one in which Jesus Christ had called upon believers to be willing to sacrifice their lives.

He preaches repeatedly about the "end times" or "last days," an apocalyptic prophesy held by a small but vocal group of Christian leaders. During his appearance with Palin in June, he declared, "I believe Alaska is one of the refuge states in the last days, and hundreds of thousands of people are going to come to the state to seek refuge and the church has to be ready to minister to them."
Reply to this comment
by trrrorislamc September 3, 2008 1:32 PM EDT
BOUNCE HUSSEIN BOUNCE

hahaha

McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2071565/posts
Reply to this comment
by trrrorislamc September 3, 2008 1:40 PM EDT
Posted by cbs3200 at 09:08 AM : Sep 03, 2008

ZOGBY IS A MORE ACCURATE POLL THAN THE LEFT WINGNUT KOOL AID DRINKING BARKING MOONBAT LIBERAL PRESS NANCY,,,

BOUNCE HUSSEIN BOUNCE

hahaha

McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2071565/posts
Reply to this comment
by trrrorislamc September 3, 2008 1:54 PM EDT
HUSSEIN SAY HE IS NOT READY TO BE PRESIDENT,,,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BHyqtaECLI

BIDEN SAYS HUSSEIN NOT READY,,,

BIDEN SAYS HE IS READY TO RUN WITH OR AGAINST MCCAIN,,,

BIDEN SAYS COUNTRY BETTER OFF WITH MCCAIN,,, THAN HUSSEIN,,,

Joe Biden On Barack Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDVUPqoowf8

HILLARY SAYS HUSSEIN NOT READY,,,

"I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he''''d bring to the White House. And Sen. Obama has a speech he gave in 2002." Hillary Clinton
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/hillary-clinton.html

THEY ARE 100% CORRECT,,,
Reply to this comment
See all 90 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs