I haven't been on DU much, so this might be off base...but...Ron Paul? Say freakin' what?!

[WilliamPitt]

(long post, flee while you can)

Have I gone right over the moon, or am I really seeing the Ron Paul campaign getting traction on DU?

If it's just a couple of Paul noisemakers who are inspiring a dozen posts in response, now would be the best time to stop reading this and abandon this post, because I'm entirely off base if that's all there is to it. Flee. Now.

I dunno, though.

There are more than a handful of people talking him up, or so it seems, several of whom have been familiar to me for some time now, and what used to be just a quiet little phenomenon during the last several weeks (mostly involving the same "Holy shit, an anti-Iraq Republican!" theme) appears to be turning into a genuine quasi-groundswell of support.

Here, I now warn you, is the point where I plop my Party Hack Assbag helmet on my head, fasten the chin-strap, and then proceed directly into The Same Old Crap That Is Dead-Bang Guaranteed To Piss A Bunch Of You Off...

1. Not so very long ago, a great hue and cry was raised because of threads supporting Cindy Sheehan's run against Speaker Pelosi. The DU rule forbidding using this board for active campaigning against office-holding Democrats was raised, and after the standard amount of tooth-gnashing and hair-tearing, the pro-Cindy/anti-Pelosi threads were no longer allowed on the board.

That was a Democrat getting challenged by a progressive (I'm ashamed to admit that I don't know whether or not Cindy is campaigning as a Dem or an independent, which keeps me from describing this as "Dem v. Dem"), so it was a fight on the Left side of things between people on our side debating people on our side, in the most general sense. DUers may disagree with Pelosi, or they may disagree with Cindy Sheehan, but the debate itself was happening on our side of the fence, and there were good points being made on both sides, which is healthy (but also against a DU policy I'm not beefing with at all, it is what it is, etc)...

...but here are all these Ron Paul threads and posts all of a sudden, and unless I took a blow to the head and forgot about it because I took a blow to the head, unless I missed a memo, unless I somehow fell through a wormhole and wound up in some wacky parallel dimension...it was my understanding that Ron Paul is running for the presidency on the Republican ticket. He is a member of the Grand Old Party, and has "Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)" on the nameplate sitting on his desk-thing in the chamber of the House of Representatives, and if it's forbidden to campaign for a progressive candidate like Cindy Sheehan, how in the name of Tom DeLay's floppy shriveled nutsack is it permitted to raise banners for the Republican presidential campaign of Ron Paul?

But that's a technical argument, only some rule-happy noise in the place of actual argument. Thus, we arrive at...( and please bear with me here, because this needs some context to make the proper point)

2. My girlfriend was recently diagnosed with a serious and degenerative illness that she will have, to one degree or another, for as long as she lives. This disease has no cure, but there are a lot of people in medical research spheres who think stem cell therapy holds great promise for either a full cure, or at least a damned effective treatment, for this disease.

Some, if not all of you probably caught last week's report about the breakthrough that happened on the stem cell front. Without delving into any hyper-technical stem cell stuff (which, truth be told, I can only repeat words and phrases about the topic from stuff I've read, kind of like a parrot caged inside a stem cell lab, just making noises I can't even begin to fathom), the breakthrough basically removes from the equation all those Fundy shitdogs.

No more GOP Reps from the Missing Chromosome Caucus can whoop up their base by yammering about Snowflake Babies, because this new method lets the scientists create legitimate stem cells without having to use any tissue material that might ever have been within ten miles of anyone's uterus, eggs, sperm, or even within earshot of someone saying the word "fetus" out loud. The Jesus Shouters have been taken off the board, which would appear to be a Big Green Go Light to get this research started for real.

FYI, people in the field have high hopes and good reason to believe stem cell therapy holds the key to cures for diabetes, can let people with bone marrow cancer avoid waiting for a donor match because stem cells combined with their own marrow will grow matching marrow that is perfect in every way, can maybe reverse the de-myelinization damage on nerve axons caused by Multiple Sclerosis...the list goes on, and this might really be some serious Star Trek shit for real, but George vetoed the research ten thousand years ago because life is sacred unless it's a life already through the birth canal and in Iraq or New Orleans or Afghanistan or Darfur or paralyzed by nerve damage or on a dialysis machine or in agony from cancer-rotted bones, lather rinse repeat...

Anyway, my girlfriend and I were kicking this new breakthrough around, and of course she was pretty pumped about it. I was forced, however, to throw a little bit of cold water onto her enthusiasm. Why? she asked. The Snowflake morons don't have a dog in this fight anymore, so what's to keep this from being picked up and run down the field?

I reminded her of Bush's veto of the health care bill for 12 million kids, his veto of millions for research on cures and treatments for several ailments including the one she's got, and reminded here above all that it is a rare thing when these guys do anything for the reasons we can see in the daylight. There's always something else underneath, a wheel within the wheel that is where their momentum is actually coming from, and I said maybe I'm wrong, but this stem cell thing fits right into that phenomenon.

Explain, she said.

Bush didn't veto the child health care bill or the research bill because he thinks they are too expensive, or even because he wants that money so he can spend it on warfare and thus kick more cash over to his friends and the others who are his real constituents. Maybe those are bennies in his mind, but neither is the real ballgame.

Bush vetoed that stuff because it would have worked.

Because any government program that shows government being an effective agent for the people has to be stopped at all costs.

Because he's a privatizer, which may very well be the only genuine ideology inside that craven pretzel-dented bone-sack wobbling above his spindly shoulderblades. That's his game.

If a government program is working, it must be smashed, because a functioning government is the best argument on Earth against privatizing everything from medicine to Social Security to the pigeons in the park. He vetoed them because they would have worked, and that can't happen.

My gilfriend got it in Technicolor, and went to my election calendar to count how many more days there are between Now and Then.

(423 days left, by the by)

Ron Paul, if I have been reading with comprehension, is well over on the libertarian side of things in the GOP. And that means, like Bush, he has little interest in allowing government to function. Government is the problem, right? That's fundamental ideology, bedrock stuff. Plus, he's pretty hardcore against choice, and tried to pass a bunch of nutjob bills declaring that life begins pretty much when the man blows a load, i.e. life begins at conception, so abortion even by way of morning-after pills (which isn't even close to "abortion") amounts to first degree murder. Smells like Snowflake bullshit to me.

Sorry, but no.

Nobody should be supported for president if they don't want government to work. I'm a liberal, a Democrat, and a fair portion of my own ideology says government can be a place where people come together to do good for other people. Does that happen? Not much, but it can, and if I get my way, it sure as hell will someday, if enough work gets done. Government would have absolutely helped 12 million kids, would have advanced research for serious diseases, would have been going great guns on stem cells for five years and counting now...

...if the bills hadn't been shitcanned by someone who wants government to fail, so his pet theories don't get challenged, and so his friends can get in on the money to come if they get their way and privatize everything in sight.

Ron Paul is against the Iraq war, which is laudable. I hope he gets beaten like a rented mule in the primaries, so he can go back to the House and help people like Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee and the other progressive House Dems put together a coalition of end-the-war votes and drop the hammer on anyone who won't get out of the way.

Also, I saw a post in one Paul thread where a DUer said something along the lines of "I'm a Democrat, which means I have an open mind about all this Paul stuff," and that is also laudable. But to be brutally candid about it, nothing can convince me that support for Paul's campaign is anything other than putting the barrels of an electoral shotgun under your chin, pulling the trigger with your toes, and blowing your laudably open mind through the top of your head and all over the ceiling tiles.

Be clear here: it's personal.

I want to tear my teeth out because of these Democrats in congress. A lot of the big-wheel Democratic presidential candidates cause my skin to crawl by varying degrees depending on which one I happen to be listening to or researching. Politics, for the most part, is pretty much spherically fucked, i.e. fucked from every direction in 360 degrees within three dimensions. Seamless fucked-dom.

But I am also fully convinced that every single Democrat, or at least enough to overwhelmingly pass bills in congress, and also every single Dem candidate for president, will not stand in the way of stem cell research, or in the way of development for therapies to cure these wretched diseases, and will at least some of the time legislate and implement government programs that help people like uninsured children, etc.

That means my support for Democrats is direct action that can help bring a day when there is a cure for what my girlfriend is suffering, a cure for the afflictions of millions more, and that, folks, is that. Period. End of file. I'm with the big blue (D) because her life depends on it, and nothing's gonna move me off that for as long as there is breath in my lungs.

Ron Paul won't do that. Ron Paul's base ideology stands against that.

And that isn't liberal, Democratic, progressive, rational or even human in any way, shape or form.

In my humble o.

[TwilightZone]

1. Elizabeth Kucinich kind of stoked the fires:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

A lot of the conversation today has been related to that.

[WilliamPitt]

4. That I saw

*shrug*

Neither one fits into the common molds of their respective parties, so their friendship makes sense. And frankly, I'm all for Dems being friendly with GOPers in the House if it helps build coalitions for important legislation.

Thanks for the link.

[Truth2Tell]

132. The Paul bashing talking points went out

to the Party Uber Alles scribes like six weeks ago dude.

Where you been?

But really, is it so hard to believe that some folks are so fed up with dishonest politics, from both the Dems and the Repubs, that they prioritize honesty over policy? Or that some folks have become so disgusted with our corrupt political system that anyone speaking the truth as they see it is a breath of fresh air, even if the truth they speak is right-wing nut-jobbery?

The message here for us Dems is that this is how bad it is out there. This is how desperate Americans are for honesty in leadership. Someday we'll figure this shit out. Someday.

[FredScuttle]

169. Honestly

Ron Paul is batshit insane.

[Truth2Tell]

173. True...... But

it still can't hurt us as Democrats to examine why people seem drawn to him, and take what we can from that.... that's all I'm sayin'

[FredScuttle]

183. People are drawn to him

because either they are unaware that he's batshit insane and only know of his anti-Iraq war stance or they themselves are as loony as him and are drawn to him like moths to a flame.

Here's what I take from it...Ron Paul supporters are either ignorant of his insanity or are insane themselves. That's all I'm sayin'...

[LeahMira]

181. Truth?

Or that some folks have become so disgusted with our corrupt political system that anyone speaking the truth as they see it is a breath of fresh air, even if the truth they speak is right-wing nut-jobbery?

Last time I looked, there was only one version of the truth... not two or three. Sure, that one version is sometimes hard to arrive at, but it's there.

I do think that some folks are so eager to end the war in Iraq that they favor anyone who is willing to state unequivocally that s/he will end it immediately, no matter the political party. Only Dennis Kucinich (to my knowledge) has made that statement. The others promise an end, but in 2010 or 2013 or whenever. I like to think (and perhaps I'm naive) that the Democratic candidates aren't making promises they can't be sure of keeping, although I'd certainly like to think that a Democratic president would end the war no matter what.

Let's just not compromise long term gains for a short term fix, even if that would fix a whole lot that's wrong with this country just now. To anyone who thinks that Ron Paul is better than our Democratic candidates, just take a look at his website. Please!

[Truth2Tell]

190. "Truth as they see it..."

In other words, not fudging what they say for public consumption. People can tell the difference.

[NorthernSpy]

101. in that case, I no longer have a candidate to support..

[mzmolly]

149. I almost dumped Edwards, then I realized which Elizabeth made that comment.

I'm sorry NorthernSpy.

[mzmolly]

148. Wow!

I can't believe those Kucinich supporters who decry "centrisim" are going to be happy about this?

[Richard Steele]

2. K&R

[TwilightZone]

3. Just so you know....

Many of the Ron Paul threads have been locked and/or deleted, particularly those expressing support. Many of the mods and admins have been pretty clear that they think he's a right-wing nutcase.

[WilliamPitt]

5. Good to know

Thanks much.

[GMFORD]

90. And rightly so.

I can add that I have an acquaintance who is in his words 'a dyed-in-the-wool libertarian'. He is very familiar with Ron Paul from when he ran on the Libertarian ticket, having met and talked with him a number of times. He told me that Ron Paul is insane, 'a complete whacko' is the term he used.

[Divine Discontent]

138. no shock from me...

the Ron Paul cult fanatics are EVERYWHERE on the net, on all the blogs, and on youtube posting their tiny lil blurbs of "this guy is good, but I'm voting for RON PAUL!" SPEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

They've just infiltrated DU is all...


and frankly,

anyone posting a comment expressing support for him as a candidate, not just for his antiwar stance, needs terminated off DU. Some DUer told me, "I believe in total free speech and you shouldn't stifle it and show bias", well go show your free speech elsewhere, because I don't wanna hear how Ron Paul is such a moderate from these nutcakes who back him....

AT ALL!

[StClone]

159. Paul is a Libertarian

He's not Progressive, He's not Liberal...he is NOT even a Dem for chrissakes. He is not for the right-sized Government he is for small Government. He is not for the best taxes ratio he is for small taxes. And, he is the type of guy to get elected and do some odd ball stuff that ends up in a ying fiasco to the Bush yang disaster. Ron Paul? Please make him go away as I see a decent crop of Dem candidates that need our support.

[TwilightZone]

161. I simply don't understand why any Democrat would support Paul over Kucinich

If they want an anti-war candidate and that is the only issue on the agenda, then Kucinich provides that along with a progressive agenda. All Paul has is the anti-war stance. Most of the rest of his positions are nutty.

[kenfrequed]

162. Agreed

While Paul is useful to bring the issue of war opposition up to the Republicans (and to disappoint those same republicans when he is not the candidate of choice) he really doesn't have a place among Democrats.

[FREEWILL56]

170. I agree with you as for if RP wants to do away with such republican

frauds on the people like repealing the patriot act then fine, but he is still of values that are contradictory with my values. Taking away the wings of the wingnuts does not make them sane or like me. It is likenning to the waxing the hood of a rusty car in that it may even appear slightly better, but it's still a piece of junk.
We have a gem among our Democrats by the name of Dennis Kucinich and he does not need polishing, but needs placed into the light to see him shine.

[mmonk]

6. I don't think there are Ron Paul support threads

or any that last. Now the latest Kucinich bashing is related to something Elizabeth said and spurred alot of Ron Paul jibber jabber.

[WilliamPitt]

9. I hope this post won't re-swat the wasp's nest.

[mmonk]

12. Fingers crossed.

[cali]

16. there's very little Kucinich bashing here, and

no candidate is above criticism. Dennis isn't a saint; he's running for office. In addition, there's always a lot of talk about Paul around here, and quite a bit of praise. All you hae to do is type in his name in search, and you'll see that that's true.

[mmonk]

24. Sorry, but one thread was pretty rough tonight.

I'm not the type to lose my cool, but almost this evening. That made it all the more sillier.

[NewJeffCT]

74. I can turn a ton of people off to Kucinich...

I was flipping through the radio the other day and heard somebody praising Kucinich. So, I stopped and figured it was some substitute progressive host or something. Though I quickly realized who it was, the host praised DK for being bold enough to take strong stands on the issues where the other candidates were wishy-washy and boring.

The host was Rush Limbaugh.

Yes, he was praising Kucinich.

[rockybelt]

79. WWhhaaat?

That must have been an episode of "The Twilight Zone."

[NewJeffCT]

87. I'm not joking, though

Rush was praising Kucinich in comparison to other Democrats

[GMFORD]

94. Dennis was willing to be interviewed

on Faux. Even those on the right have respect for him...which doesn't hurt them since they don't think he will be the candidate anyway. How can anyone not respect someone who walks the walk? No subterfuge with Kucinich.

Regarding Rush L., O'Lielly, Hannity, Scarborough, Gibson(especially) et al -- do you ever get the feeling that in 'real life' they don't believe any of the crap they are paid to say on TV? That they are like Stephen Colbert, playing a character who has the same name?

[rockybelt]

136. Stephen Colbert

is supposed to be funny. These guys are not funny whatsoever.
I do not trust them even when they have good things to say about a dem. I should say ESPECIALLY when they have good things to say.

[NewJeffCT]

145. Rush admitted he lies for the Republicans

He is basically there to promote the RW line. However, I think some of the younger ones have been brainwashed into believing their BS.

[kenfrequed]

163. Oh yeah

Such a turn off there.

I wonder if Rush pumping Kucinich isn't a tactic. Discredit and shred the progressive left. Ensure that only the safe corporate candidates get picked. I would LOVE to hear the EXACT context of Rush's compliments towards Kucinich. But of course the post works better for the Hillaryites if you just leave it out of context.

[NewJeffCT]

178. I don't support any candidate

and I'm certainly not a Hillaryite. If Gore was in the race, I'd support him, but I didn't commit to a candidate in 2004 and I'm not going to commit to one in 2008 unless something changes dramatically over the next few months. I'm not even planning on voting in the primary because I don't really want to commit to anybody.

But, I gave you the context of why he praised Kucinich - it was the day after a debate. He said the other Democrats in the debate were boring and bland, didn't want to take strong stands on any issues and were just playing it safe. He said he admired Kucinich because he at least told everybody where he stood on the issues and wasn't afraid to take strong stands. I think he started it off by calling him an "elf" or something like that, though, and it certainly wasn't about politics - it was more about personality.

[kenfrequed]

179. So...

Because Rush acknowledged that Kucinich actually distinguished himself as a liberal democrat with viewpoints that can be distinguished from his opposition, this is a reason we should be turned off by Kucinich?

I mean, that is how you intro'd your post: "I can turn a lot of people off to Kucinich"

I do apologize if I mischaracterized you, but you have to admit the seeming intent of your post was at best provocative and at worst inflammatory.

[cali]

7. sorry to hear about your gf, will

hope she's feeling alright, and that the two of you are handling this news with aplomb- or something related.

Ron Paul has been gaining a bit of traction here. It's sort of sneaky. no one will admit to supporting him, but they yammer on about how honorable he is, and how he's constitutionalist, blah blah blas. When you slam him for some of his heinous ideas, they always defend and excuse. On several polls, he got substantial support

Just want to note that Sheehan is running as an independent, and that's why advocacy for her is here is a no no.

[WilliamPitt]

14. Thanks

Was there ever any discussion about what the rules would say if she was running as a Dem against the Dem speaker? Seems like a sticky wicket.

Cheers.

[cali]

20. It would be fine to support her if she was challenging

Pelosi in the primary. That was made clear.

And cheers right back at you: Here's to you and your gf.

[EST]

43. Cali is speaking the absolute truth.

This is a democratic site first and had Ms. Sheehan chosen to oppose Ms. Pelosi in the primary as a dem, all would be fine.

Mr. Paul is a rut rooting and rutting republican with a bong. There are actually a lot of Reps who privately oppose the continued occupation of Iraq on ideological grounds but are fascists through and through. He's one of them.

[blondeatlast]

129. Your last line sums him up on Iraq perfectly. I don't want to pal around with these types at all. nt

[hlthe2b]

19. He's an enigma to many... a supposed Repug who speaks out

against the Bush* administration, the war, the attacks on civil liberties, and the other Repugs running. So, he is intriguing to some, particularly the essentially "single issue" folks (the war). As important as ending the war and reversing the attacks on our constitution, Ron Paul is horrendous in other areas (as are most true libertarians). But, on a superficial exploration, he manages to entice quite a few folks.

You are quite right, though. He is no Dem/Liberal/Progressive and we can not allow for some to be bamboozled into thinking otherwise.

[NeedleCast]

39. I understand it to an extent

He's one of the choices for those looking for a change and who think the "corporate" dems are no different than their republican counter parts. It's sort of like people are saying "well fuck, if it comes down to a Hillary/Giuliani race, I can either catapult myself into the sun, or take my chances with Paul." He's running a smart campaign in a year when many people are disillusioned with both sides. He's also one of the few politicians in the running who seems to be willing to say "yeah, some of my ideas are a little out there, but that's what they are" and again, in a period going back to Bush 1.0's "No New Taxes" quote, people are looking for a politician who will be honest with them.

As an aside, I'll say that I don't support Paul and think he's a right wing loon, but with both the President and Congress having approval ratings in the toilet, a lot of people out there are looking to go in a new direction, and maybe don't care what that direction is, as long as it's different from what we've got now.

[rhett o rick]

59. I understand to an extent also. I get so very frustrated when my congress critters ignore me.

They vote for the Patriot Act, for the BushCorp war, Gonzales and Mukasey, NAFTA, CAFTA, they don't show any outrage when the FISA law and Constitution are violated. I get frustrated with the Democratic Party that sells out to corporations, the same ones that buy the republican party. And then to add insult to injury, when they come to me and say that I have to vote with them because of "lesser of evils". What a hell of a mess. I certainly understand the desire to vote third party or not vote. I think some of these Democrats toying with supporting Paul, are only showing their frustration for the GD status quo.

But I will NGU. Like Thom Hartman says we must get involved in the party at the local levels and try to change it from the mess that it is today.

[Auntie Bush]

172. So you're saying not to go forward because you will definitely fall into the river

so you should back up and go in the opposite direction even though you will fall off the cliff...because it's at least a new direction? Make sense!

How about the choice of going left or right into the unknown? Who knows...you just might find a way out of the woods? Naw...can't do that because you have no proof that way is any better...can't take a chance that you might get hit by a car.

[texanshatingbush]

112. Ron Paul signs have been cropping up on our small-town roadways here in Texas.....

....they seem to be designed to appeal to disaffected progressives.

The signs are posted in pairs. The first one says: "Missing the Constitution?"

Twenty feet down the road, the second sign says: "So is Ron Paul"


I think Will is right in reminding us: Ron Paul is a LIBERTARIAN--the least government is the best government, in his opinion. DimSon has already shown us what happens when government abrogates its responsibilities. Whoever would have thought that GWB believes in social- and economic-Darwinism??? It's not a pretty picture, is it?

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. The Ron Paul gang here in Kansas City hired a plane to do a flyover

of Arrowhead Stadium, where Kansas and Missouri are playing this big football game tonight.

The plane was scheduled to do the flyover at 2:30.

Parking lot (tailgating) open at 3:00.

Game started at 7:00.

[annabanana]

15. Two good things about RP

1) anti-war
2) split the GOP even more than dueling fundies already are

that's it.

[WilliamPitt]

21. Could he maybe go save-the-fetuseseses third party, perhaps?

There's been some quacking within the GOP Fundy-anti-choice-base ranks about getting behind a third party candidate who is all fetus all the time.

(or is it "fetii"?)

Paul's stance on the war argues strongly against the idea, but you gotta wonder. There aren't many people in America with his level of choice-hatred and the record to match it. I think he has a 23,000,543% approval rating from the National Fuck Yourself Once Your Born Coalition, or something like that.

[annabanana]

27. The rank & file seem to be interested in Huckabee...

Their leaders are all over the place..

[mmonk]

40. !

"National Fuck Yourself Once Your Born Coalition"

[sharp_stick]

10. Really?

Christ, I haven't been paying attention but good god I hope not. I mean Paul is probably as close to nuts as they come isn't he?

He's not into the war like the rest of the repukes but fuck when it comes to the rest of the nutjob platform he's all over it.

Anybody that gives that little tool the time of day is probably not worth the time it would take to respond.

[Mojorabbit]

52. The other thing he has

going for him is his anti patriot act bill. I wouldn't want him as president but I appreciate anyone who is for restoring our constitutional rights no matter who they are.

[Hissyspit]

11. Ron Paul sucks, to begin with...

and he's running as a Republican and would be the leader of that party as president, the party that
ABSOLUTELY needs to be defeated in 2008. 'Nuff said.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

13. Agreed. Ron Paul is anathema to democracy.

K & R

[BlueJazz]

17. I too, was not very active at DU for a short time. When I came back I thought....

...that somehow I had stepped into "Bizarro World"... where Republicans who are against everything that helps the Human Race are just Peachy Keen.

..And just to show my Paranoia, I wonder if all the Democrat Bashing crap is the work of Trolls put here by the RNC.

[MelissaB]

18. I agree, and I've been scratching my head about the Ron Paul thing.

I also think you deserve a DUzy for this line:

".. how in the name of Tom DeLay's floppy shriveled nutsack..."

[WilliamPitt]

22. That was one of those lines my fingers typed without my brain getting involved.

Go on, fellas. Do your thing.

Clickety clickety nutsack clickety.

I need help.

[Blue_In_AK]

28. That is such a disturbing visual....ewwww.....

[Audio_Al]

62. Well, as a 73-year-old man with what might be described by someone younger as...

a "floppy shriveled nutsack", I must focus your attention on some of my own personal biology. Due to having had mumps during my youth, one of my nuts is kind of almond sized, while the other is more like a walnut anyway, so besides everything, I'm pretty lopsided. I'm not so sure it's exactly "shriveled" but it is, to coin phrase about a well-know Chinese man, "One Hung Low," like most older men. Nevertheless, I have sired three children, so I'm just glad something worked, floppy or not.

Oh, may I also state that I have never, nor do I actually want to -- SEE Tom Delay's scrotum, either in the flesh or in a photo. Your word picture sustains me quite well for all time.

Meanwhile, you probably have not had to endure three score and ten -- plus three extra years -- contending with the ravages of gravity on YOUR particular nutsack. And, damn, I just hope you're not just friggin' prejudiced against old men, because, Fate willing, you'll get there yourself someday.

As for the rest of your post, I agree completely with the Ron Paul glad-handing. Stupid. Dumb. Not interested. We have our own flip-flopping Senator Gordon Smith (R), who is supposedly against the war, but nobody knows for sure because of his voting record. We're out to defeat him in 2008 and glad to do it.

Also, Will, I feel saddened about the diagnosis received by your girlfriend. I hope she receives the finest medical care and that her condition improves and that we can all benefit from upcoming research in so many of the difficult diseases to which we humans are prone.

Respectfully,



Audio Al, your Radio Pal

[GMFORD]

109. Ron Paul has a prolific and dedicated

bunch of internet trolls. There is no liberal, conservative, evangelical or wingnut message board that I've ever seen that is free of them. I've read so many posts by Ron Paul people who say he is the most Progressive and/or the most Conservative and/or the most Christian and/or the most Populist candidate in either party. His supporters make a lot of noise, that's for sure.

[WilliamPitt]

110. Same mistake Kucinich made in '04.

Kucinich had by far and away the largest web presence during that campaign. They absolutely beat the shit out of everyone in every online poll. After enough time with that happening, the campaign started to think it actually meant something besides the same 25,000 people talking to each other.

Nope. Didn't translate into much beyond those 25,000 votes. It won't for Paul, either.

[bridgit]

23. My sense is that the base DU admiration for Paul isn't even based *in* Paul...

But rather in the perception he has cultivated whereby he is seen as one simply willing to rail against Bush which could; or may likely be little more than a heads-up poli sci group with a hand full of polling data suggesting that he do just that,

the enemy of my enemy may on some level be my friend...maybe, but not the cultivated perception

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

25. Every now and then a thread pops up on DU

wherein the poster comments cheerfully that Ron Paul is pretty good for a Republican because he opposes the Iraq disaster, and they might even link to a Paul website. Evidently the fact that Paul opposes the war is the only thing that matters, despite the fact that on most other issues he's some distance to the right of Darth Vader. He's mainly a batshit-crazy Randian objectivist Libertarian who opposes almost all economic regulation -- he's an Austrian school free-market type, maybe even worse than Milton Friedman and the Chicago boys, although he's more than happy to have the government regulate and preferably prohibit reproductive choice and stem cell research.

Paul has been very critical of Bush, but we can't forget that the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend. I usually stomp on pro-Paul threads if I find them, and I'm glad to hear that the mods are starting to 86 the more ardent Paul supporters.

[Truth2Tell]

156. I think that to the rabid (and foolish) Paul supporters

several things matter: The war, and American imperialism in general. The (false) perception that he cares about the Constitution. And the fact that he actually truthfully says what he really believes.

Voters are desperate for politicians that really address these three things. So some - make that many - are willing to overlook the fact that Paul is a raving right-wing racist kookoo head.

As Democrats we should take note of this, IMHO. Maybe our top teir candidates could even address this stuff - imperialism, the Constitution and the widespread lack of faith in our democracy - as campaign issues. Maybe?

(Other than Kucinich, of course, who already does)

[SemiCharmedQuark]

26. Well I keep noticing the same people popping up in those threads

So I think it's only a few posters, and the rest of us just can't help but take the bait because Paul is such a jackass.

Regarding the stem cells, I heard the news and was very pleased. However, I think a lot of people are jumping the gun. They aren't sure if these stem cells behave differently from embryonic stem cells. It is important to pursue all options vigorously. I fear that this may be used as ammunition to stop all embryonic stem cell research and any advancement that can be won from said research.

[Junkdrawer]

29. For the past month or so, there have been 3 or 4 long anti-Paul threads per day...

Why has always been a mystery. But I guess if you spend that much time telling folks "Don't look at X, it's bad for you!" you're bound to get a rash of X watching.

Human nature.

[WilliamPitt]

30. True enough.

[PufPuf23]

31. Thank you for writing that Ron Paul is not a reasonable candidate

You are spot on about the GOP goal to reduce government and the method: failed programs and privatization and loss of checks and balances and oversight. There is not much choice but to vote D. Best wishes for you and your love and all those scientists able to be busy in their labs.

[mmonk]

32. I think where Ron Paul gets kudos sometimes is

related to his dislike of the Iraq invasion, support for impeachment, and support for restoring constitutional provisions taken away by the bush administration. That however should not be translated as support but as recognition he is right on those particular issues. He is wrong on Roe v Wade, small starve the government libertarian politics, some civil rights issues, stem cell research, etc.

[MuseRider]

33. Baffles me too.

I agree that it is good that he is anti Iraq occupation but the rest of his policy statements make me want to run and hide and cry mommy.

I am impatiently waiting for an explanation from Dennis and Elizabeth about her statement and what that means exactly. The inclusion would make this die hard Kucitizen flea as fast as she could.

[riqster]

185. You probably won't get it

The sole source is the Cleveland Plain Dealer, which DK does not speak to after decades of hatchet jobs.

Why Elizabeth was quote there, I do not know, but Kooch will not speak to the PeeDee. Can't blame him.

[riqster]

186. Dupe

[patrice]

34. Thanks for this. I'm acting on Issues around grassroots Libertarians.

I have been passive with them though I have the instinct that I disagree with them about a lot more than I agree with them about.

I think if we are to be a nation, we must have more in common than Libertarians propose. There must be more to "our" identity than a national defense and foreign trade policy. We must share some basic values about what our relationships, micro and macro, mean. What our responsibilities to one another are. That includes the best basic level of health care possible and the research necessary to support it.

[Withywindle]

35. Yeah, it's weird.

Ron Paul's people had a VERY visible (all the way to obnoxious) presence at the anti-war march here in Chicago on Oct 27th. Yeah, he's anti-war. Good for him. But actually supporting him suggests that you're such a single-issue person that you're willing to throw poor people, women, LGBT people, ethnic minorities (dude, guess who's IN those 'troops' we want to bring home) under the bus once they're back here. Nuh-uh.

On to more important matters, I'm sending your gf good thoughts; I'm sorry to hear this, and I hope so much we actually get a government that cares about science and medicine back ASAP.

[rasputin1952]

36. Ron Paul is an R w/a serious Libertarian slant....

He's trying to run as a "crossover populist"..it isn't going to work.

I think he'll split the R vote because of the "tax issue", other than that, he's a flash in the pan...campaign slogan is more like... (got glitter)

[bridgit]

38. agreed...

[tnlefty]

37. Take a very deep breath, go pour youself a drink, take another deep

breath...

At our last peace rally (Chattanooga) there were lots of Ron Paul signs and a lot of them being carried by 50+ yr. olds from Democracy for Chattanooga members. I've had discussions (okay loud discussions with them) and this is what I get:

1. End the war and there will be more resources available for what needs to be done/fixed in this country. (Despite the fact that he won't fix any of society's ills)

2. Congress won't allow him to put his most radical agendas through.

It chills me, and I'm sorry to learn about your g/f, but you should know there is this sort of thinking out there!

[TankLV]

96. "Congress won't allow him to put his most radical agendas through"

Gee - that worked sooo well during raygun's reign, then bush I and now bush II.

That has got to be the most disingenuous statement ever uttered in the last 30 years.

That along with "when the Dems are the majority..." crap that has been proven pure CRAP.

For the life of me I can't understand why the Dems are acting like they are now...

[kentuck]

41. I think the biggest threat from Ron Paul...

is not what he brings to the Republican Party - it is what he takes from the Democratic Party. The Independent voters in 2006 starting trending bigtime to the Democratic Party. They were totally turned off by "W" and the neo-cons. What Ron Paul does is give them an excuse not to support the Democratic Party. All the Democrats need to do to cancel out the Ron Paul vote is to stand up for the Constitution and to adopt his position on the War in Iraq. The Democrats cannot afford to lose those voters.

[mmonk]

44. Yes, he is a threat in regards to independent support.

[5446]

88. Well.

The Independent voters in 2006 starting trending bigtime to the Democratic Party. They were totally turned off by "W" and the neo-cons. What Ron Paul does is give them an excuse not to support the Democratic Party.

As someone who votes with his beliefs and not with party affiliations, I disagree with you.

Ron Paul doesn't give me an excuse to not support the Democratic party, the idiots I elected in the last two elections have done more than enough on that front for themselves, especially the last batch.

RP or not, this time around anyone who's not done a damn thing for my goals, or who is not an incumbant, gets the nod, party lines be damned. When it comes to the POTUS, I'm deeply concerned because the front runners from both parties are useless windbags who are out to do more damage to our country than they'll fix.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, gives me someone who supports the Constitution and will do much in the way of bringing things back in line with what the framers intended. I'm not stupid enough to believe for a second that income tax, et al, will be razed (even if he tried, Congress would prevent that). I'm also of no belief that abortion would be outlawed, not only would Congress seek to battle that, but abortion is such a major plank for both parties they'll forever seek to keep it in flux.

[TankLV]

97. Then you are a prime example of the fool that Will mentions in his post.

CONGRESS WILL DO NOTHING! REPUKE paul will do nothing "what the framers intended" (which, BTW, is a REPUKE phrase, that is entirely BULLSHIT - since the Constitution is a LIVING DYNAMIC construct and nothing could be farther from the truth than that REPUKE phrase).

Dems or not.

That has already been proven - even tho dems are in the majority.

Get that thru your aparently thick skull.

[rhett o rick]

108. Your last paragraph lost me. But it seems that you would vote for RP because you believe Congress

will keep him in check? You don't mention if you believe the income tax shuld be scrapped or Roe v Wade overturned. What do you believe?

[Aristus]

42. Will, Ron Paul is the Resurgent Republican Of The Week.

A flop-sweaty effort on the part of the Repukes to be able to say: "See, we do TOO have viable candidates!"

Now they're doing it with Huckabee.

Still a long time until the nominations. Stay cool.

[TwilightZone]

45. A somewhat-related poll from a couple weeks ago:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Lots of anti-Hillary stuff in there, of course, but disturbing nonetheless.

[johncoby2]

46. It doesnt matter. Paul has as much chance as Kucinich......

to get the nomination from their parties.

[WilliamPitt]

47. I'm only talking about Paul as a DU-specific phenomenon

I go to the DU-Bloodbath forum if I want to talk about actual campaign stuff.

[blogslut]

48. Pay no attention to the RP supporters

They are as foolish as the Kinky Friedman gang. Just relish in the fact that there may be enough of them to spoil the republican ticket. Yeehaw!

[Rex]

49. Well I just found out people CHEERED the fires in Cali!!!

HERE. Must be trolls.

See what happens when you go off and do who knows what?

[MonkeyFunk]

50. sadly

that's par for the course here.

recently, a few members were cheering hunting accidents - expressing glee that people get killed and maimed.

Being a democrat doesn't give one humanity or compassion.

[Rex]

53. Evidently not.

Must be trolls, I have a hard time believing sincere DUrs cheer on that kinda crap.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WilliamPitt]

63. Um...of course he does.

He's, like, won elections and served in congress and stuff. I, like, haven't and stuff.

[Hippo_Tron]

54. But Will, he wants to return to the gold standard, that will solve all of our problems

[Strelnikov_]

55. "pro-life libertarianism"

Um . . .

[WilliamPitt]

57. Jesus freakin' Christ

Somehow, the absolute idiocy of that position totally eluded me until you pointed it out.

Now I feel stupid and inadequate.

And also kinda awestruck at the contortions that must be required for him to hold those two things together. It's entirely possible that he could be challenged during a debate on how his libertarianism can rationally coexist alongside his embrace of a government-enforced quasi-fascist patriarchal lockdown of all fertile women, and the question could cause him to lose control of the necessary contortion...and he'd literally wind up shitting his liver through the assof his suitpants, across the stage, and onto Blitzer's absurd hair-farm on national television.

I'd pay to see that one.

[flying rabbit]

118. I'll never get that visual out of my head.

Thanks for that.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

182. OMFG, Will you just rocked my world! I'm going to borrow that if you don't mind

A politician friend of mine is going to be debating a libertarian next week at a local club and I'm helping him to prepare for it. Libertarian dude is a huge Ron Paul supporter, natch. We're already planning to point out the absurdity of a Rand-ite such as Greenspan being able to countenance the existence of the Federal Reserve, much less chairing it. Now we can also watch him shit his liver trying to parse Paul's abortion position.

[WilliamPitt]

188. Let me know what happens

[blondeatlast]

131. One mustn't even try to wrap one's head around that logic.

I tried discussing that with some truly Libertarian friends (yes, I admit I have some) and it made both of us call for another Urquell.

Ouchity.

[frogmarch]

56. By the same token, Chuck Hagel,

because of his anti-war stance, is another so-called "good" repug. But when his voting record is examined, it's easy to see that except for his being against the war, he's a repug through and through.

Ron Paul should not be considered a good guy! It's scary to see some DUers supporting the asshole.

Fabulous post, Will! K&R

[spag68]

58. Ron Paul

The only thing good about Mr. Paul, is that he would almost be the best we could hope to run against. No real Dem. is going to support him as it is pretty clear he is more batshit crazy then rudy or mccain

[rhett o rick]

60. Ron Paul would be a very stupid choice for vice president. He is way too outspoken.

A president needs a vice president that will help him get elected. I think for every republican Paul would bring to the ticket would be at least equal to a Democrat leaving.
Vice presidents need to keep in the back ground and not take attention from the president. Don't think that is Paul.
Democrats would always wonder if Paul as vice president would be working to make the Democratic president look bad.

Best of wishes for you and your g/f.

[kineneb]

61. hmmm, Ron Paul...Stormfront. Says it all for me.

Grandpa always said to look at the candidate's supporters, as an indication of where he/she stands.

...not interested anything/one supported by the fascist whackos...

[Tberg]

64. Ron Paul

Dear William,

I'm sorry about your girlfriend!

However my take is different than yours so guess I'm pulling the trigger then.

As a 26 year always voting Democrat I have been disenchanted with the party for some time. I am now supporting Ron Paul However if Dennis K were a front runner I would support him.

The underlying foreign policy between the "mainstream" Democrats and repugs is so similar. CFR, NAFTA, WTO etc etc. I'm so tired of hearing politicians telling me that they will look after our interests over seas without explaining exactly what those interests are? Are we stupid or what? Why lie to the American people? What are they hiding? Ron Paul is answering those questions.

None of the Democratic contenders is talking about monetary policy or paying for the debt we have already incurred I.E., SS, MC, national debt in treasury notes and bonds payable to world governments. I don't know about you but I think we should run a balanced budget, enough of robbing Peter to pay Paul. The low and middle wage earners are the ones getting soaked. What about the devaluing dollar soon we won't be worth anything. I am amazed how the rest of the world sees clearly what is happening yet the American public is mostly blind to the precarious situation we are in in terms of our financial solvency. I mean OPEC is talking about trading in currency other than US dollars, just the fact it is being discussed should be a huge warning because currently something like 90% of all oil is traded in US dollars. If oil trades in currencies other than US dollars our money will be worth even less with the possibility of it's collapse.

That is tied into the war which is Killing us physically and financially, I voted Democratic in the last congressional election to end the war and feel that the Democratic leadership has failed in their duty to STOP the war. In addition I believe it is our foreign policies of the past 25 years that have created the animosity toward the US and are playing into the "terrorists" hand. Bin Laden makes it clear they cannot beat us militarily but they will aim for our "center of gravity" that is they will attack us financially. I suggest that to continue to exist as free people we need to strengthen our financial situation and not our military grip on the world. Clinton on Iran "were taking nothing off the table"

I don't here the Democratic front runners talking about a non-intervention foreign policy why are we using military force to police the world.

Before I decided to support Ron Paul I did a lot of soul searching and researched all of Paul's voting record, read his speeches from the house archives and was surprised by what I heard and agreed with much of it. Some of it is hard for me to swallow but in the big picture I think he is correct on what the most important issues are. Based on what you wrote I don't think you have fully researched his position so I will point out some misstatements of yours.



""life begins at conception, so abortion even by way of morning-after pills (which isn't even close to "abortion") amounts to first degree murder.""


Ron Paul has publicly said he would support the morning after pill. The Abortion issue is not black and white and while I don't agree with Paul on his entire stance some of it I do. It has been used as a wedge issue for far too long. Dennis Kucinich said "I believe life begins at conception and that our priority should be to make abortions obsolete, by preventing unwanted pregnancy, promoting abstinence, and promote life affirming programs after birth" I and Ron Paul would agree with that statement.


""and so his friends can get in on the money to come if they get their way and privatize everything in sight.""


So William my question to you is this; Are you saying that because Hilary or Obama would do more through the government that their special interests (friends) that finance them won't get in on the money to come? If I were you I would look carefully at any candidates federal election commission reports and ask what is the pay off for the huge contributions. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008 Ron Paul is getting virtually zero special interest money he has only the People to answer too. His voting record doesn't support corporate interests and he is openly anti military industrial complex.


""That means my support for Democrats is direct action that can help bring a day when there is a cure for what my girlfriend is suffering, a cure for the afflictions of millions more, and that, folks, is that. Period. End of file. I'm with the big blue (D) because her life depends on it, and nothing's gonna move me off that for as long as there is breath in my lungs.

Ron Paul won't do that. Ron Paul's base ideology stands against that.""


Although I can't persuade you I don't agree with that at all, First off the man is a doctor he would want nothing more than a cure for you girlfriend. Also he has been one of the loudest advocates for your choice to chose the medicine or treatment that you want. The WTO, FDA and others have already and are at work to limit your choices of medications and treatments. What if the cure for your girlfriend was available but the FDA said you can't use it, who is protecting you then. I realized this is a very personal issue for you but stem sells are not the only cures out there, one has to look at the whole picture.

A further observation on health care is that we Americans spend nearly 2 times as much as virtually all other modern westernized nations on health care so until we fix the underling problems; HMO, insurance company and pharmaceutical monopolies we will continue to pay more and get less. For me it is a big problem as I already pay too much and get almost no benefit as we primarily use naturopathic and other "alternative" care .

The bottom line is we need drastic change from truthful politicians and a reconnection with the constitution which is the contract that protects our rights and liberties from government debasement. Enough of, Of the Special Interest For the Special Interest already!

Take care and trust I will pray for your girlfriend as I will pray for my mom who is fighting cancer.

Paul

[TankLV]

98. But don't mention his virulently anti-gay agenda...

VIRULENTLY.

ANTI.

GAY.

and a bigot to boot.

Nice to see you're willing to throw us under the bus...

Get lost - along with your faulty "reasoning"...

[onehandle]

65. 44% of DUers prefer Ron Paul over Hillary Clinton.

Lemmings.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[upi402]

66. 269 votes

I hope that's NOT a representative group!!!

[Islander Expat]

68. WOW, DU has locked the poll!

LOL!

[2008]

67. Tom DeLay's nutsack is smooth and buoyant

This has nothing to do with the case you're making here, but I just wanted to set the record straight.

[LeftishBrit]

127. How do you know? Inquiring minds, and all that!

[2008]

167. It's common knowledge in Ron Paul's inner circle (nt)

[blondeatlast]

133. I don't even want to know how you know this. Yuck. nt

[2008]

166. hey, I remember you!

"blond eat last"

heh heh

(i know, i know, that's not what it means)

[NobleCynic]

69. I have seen very little Ron Paul support here

My take on him is Ron Paul is useful in that splits the Libertarians from the Republicans, further fracturing their base. The more support he gets, the better. But only up to a certain point.

I believe Ron Paul would likely be the worst possible candidate for us to face in the general. His Iraq war stance alone may be enough to confuse and blur the distinctions between Democrat and Republican to the less informed voters out there. His black and white absolutism stances are very powerful, regardless of their lunacy.

I think there is a fine line regarding Ron Paul. I'd like to see him get 2nd or 3rd in the primaries, things turn ugly, and his supporters walk away from the general when Ron Paul loses. If that happens, we walk away with an easy general election win. If he wins the primary, it will be one hell of a fight.

[cornermouse]

70. I'm with you.

Around here in deep-dyed red heartland, they don't think the other candidates are hardline enough so there are a lot of people pushing Ron Paul. I'm sick and tired of the signs, letters, etc. I don't know why people are pushing him on DU.

[glowing]

71. This is exactly why I oppose him... the privatization thing... when he

was a practising doctor, he refused patients who use medicare because on pricipal he believes that the consumer should find a private company to pay their way... This is the debate I have with a lot of Pinkers who are propping Paul up like he's the next saint.... I had an in depth debate with this one woman and explained that we are the govt. saying we want smaller govt, is saying we don't want ourselves... If we want public transportation, healthcare, an education, and environmental and consumer protections, it is our right to have these things... And like it or not, taxes pay for these services. Corporations cannot be trusted, because they have to make a profit. They will cut corners and provide shitty service all in the name of the stock holders (and it is their job to do this--its illegal for a business not to make money).

Anyway. I won't allow my dicontent for the way these agencies run now, addle my brain into thinking that these agencies aren't necessary. They just need a president and a legislative branch to make them work for us.

[ulysses]

72. agreed.

Much as I dream of an alternative to a certain strain of Democrats, a libertarian isn't what I had in mind...

[NewJeffCT]

73. I got taken to task for pointing out Paul was wrong on a ton of issues

Just because he is right on Iraq doesn't outweigh his opposition to so many progressive causes. So, I got taken to task because Iraq was just so much more important than anything else. I listed a good 40-50 issues, but the poster boiled it all down to Iraq vs stem cells... (and, in the long run, stem cell research could be as big as the polio or smallpox vaccines were previously - possibly bigger.)

It seems we still have that circular firing squad mentality.

Sorry to hear about your girlfriend as well.

[tomp]

75. i think the kucinich campaign stepped in it...

...with these comments about paul and anti-kucinichists are taking full advantage. surprise!

or, perhaps, dennis is smarter than some think and has no intention of uniting with paul except on progressive legislation (even though they are friends) but is crossing the dem-repub line in his own subversive way. remember, dennis has stated he will not support the dem candidate unless she/he renounces war as an instrument of foreign policy. dennis, like many of us is sorely disappointed with the dems.

[L. Coyote]

76. Ron Paul SUCKS with a capital R!

[LynneSin]

77. I swear DU is filled with frogs just happy to take the Scorpion across the river

Anyone here at DU STUPID enough to support Ron Paul deserves to be bit.

Sure - the guy is against the war, but how can ANYONE be so fricking narrow-minded to support someone based on one issue only.

My Supreme Court is way too valuable to turn it over to someone like Ron Paul. Any Democrat candidate is a far better choice.

[LeftishBrit]

78. THANKS for this!

In one sense I'm out of this, being British and never likely to live under a Ron Paul regime; but in a larger sense, I think that it's really important for progressives everywhere to stick together on the important issues, and avoid links with far-RW-ers just because they're also opposed to Bush or to the war. The far-right groups in Europe, such as the British National Party and LePen's nutcase National Front, are generally opposed to the war on isolationist grounds; this is no reason for our joining up with them.

RW libertarianism, in my mind, is a lot of fine-sounding words which, translated into my best Anglo-Saxon, basically mean: "Fuck the poor! Fuck the ill or disabled! Fuck the elderly! - Oh, and while you're at it, fuck the environment!" Not something that I'm prepared to get on board with.

I am sorry to hear about your girlfriend's illness, and wish her all the best, and hopefully that research will lead to a cure.

[lonestarnot]

80. Ron Paul sucks ass. He's a piglicon and that's all one needs to know.

Thanks for your post. K & R

[mamameow]

81. rod paul/stem cell

the biggest reason for vetoing stem cell is money. stem cell would aleviate long term illnesses, requiring LONG TERM MEDICATIONS!!!! DRUG COMPANIES WOULD HURT!!!!!!!!!

[The Doctor.]

82. About the new stem cell advancement....

It's no panacea. I was listening to Stice on some radio show I can't recall, and he said that the genes they implant in the skin cells to create stem cells can cause cancer in the cell.

http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/112407/uganews_2007...

This doesn't mean these lines can't give us some great research, but the issue isn't laid to rest yet.

Now, there's no reason to tell the fundies that and see them go out and vote over it... is there?

[Joanne98]

83. I agree in general but....

Ron Paul doesn't just want to get out of Iraq. He wants to shut down military bases all over the world. That's a big deal if you believe we're an empire. Also, I think some people on the left believe if they had any help on the right they could get things done. Example. Blocking the FCC from expanding media power. The Janet Jackson boob thing. You have a coalition from the right and left and it shut the thing down pronto. What would happen if you used that model on the military/services/industrial/complex? Ron Paul is also against the war on drugs. No Democrat will be that bold. People are getting desperate about the police state. EVERYBODY is getting pissed about the tasers. In other words..WE'RE TIRED OF GOING TO JAIL.

The Democrats have a fatal flaw! In catering to the "cultural left" (racist sexist anti-gay) they have reduced themselves to 'identity" politics. They've won the war (in the minds of most voters) but they're still fighting it. At the cost, I may add, of the average American who is fighting to pay their bills. Just like the big business republicans tricking the christian right to vote on cultural issues only (What's the Matter with Kansas) so they wouldn't think about MONEY! The DLC Democrats have done the same thing. We fight for minority rights (women blacks gays) but we don't talk about MONEY!

Whether you like Ron Paul or not he does TALK ABOUT MONEY! He talks about the POLICE STATE. He's an old-fashion Republican who's anti-war (like they used to be) He's hitting a nerve among democrats only because their leaders have refused to address these issues.

I personally don't trust Paul because he's a Libertarian. I despise the "Virtue of Selfishness" crowd. I have watched them for years waiting for them to fight for some of their issues I care about (war on drugs) BUT all they seem to be able to do is GET ANOTHER TAX CUT!

The era of identity politics is over! It's so sixties! This is the point that Obama is making and it's why he is rising in the polls. The power of the Christian right is crumbling. Law and order Republicans are over too. Taser backlash. Too many people in jail! The security moms now have to worry about their children getting thrown in prison for something, so they will become the anti-security moms very soon!

So what do the really pissed off people in the country think about?

MONEY! Trade deals, immigration, WALL STREET CORRUPTION!
Police state. War on drugs and war on terror. Get rid of them!

They also worry about the country going bankrupt. And they don't want to give up their public services (social security/medicare). All the "I want a tax cut white males" are about to turn into "Get your hands off my Social Security checks" Something has to give. That means the empire has to go! They may not agree with Paul on SS but they're smart enough to know there's not enough money for guns and butter both. They seek to use paul to cut military spending so they can save their SS! It's cynical but it will work! The Dems could do this also but they are to afraid of being called unpatriotic!

Ron Paul isn't going to win. He may get 15%. But that's a shot across the bow of the of all the pols who think we just care about social issues. The truth is WE DON'T and we want to talk about MONEY!

I don't know who's going to be the next President, but I sure that he/she is going to be MISERABLE the whole time. This country is pissed off and that ain't going away anytime soon! I see a third party on the horizon! The Lou Dobbs revolution. Laugh if you want but it's coming!

[LeftishBrit]

128. Huh?

'In catering to the "cultural left" (racist sexist anti-gay) they have reduced themselves to 'identity" politics. They've won the war (in the minds of most voters) but they're still fighting it. At the cost, I may add, of the average American who is fighting to pay their bills. Just like the big business republicans tricking the christian right to vote on cultural issues only (What's the Matter with Kansas) so they wouldn't think about MONEY! The DLC Democrats have done the same thing. We fight for minority rights (women blacks gays) but we don't talk about MONEY!

Whether you like Ron Paul or not he does TALK ABOUT MONEY!'

Well, I agree that one has to think about money; and that a failure to do so is a problem with many centre-left parties these days. That's the problem with the common statement that one is 'socially liberal but economically conservative'. I do think that the 'cultural issues' - protection of minority groups and gays and all who are threatened by bigotry - are absolutely crucial; but so are the economic issues - protection against poverty. To me, it's important to be liberal both socially *and* economically.

BUT how does Ron Paul come into this? He isn't economically liberal at all. He's to the RIGHT of most Republicans on poverty/ welfare state issues.

And no, I don't think that the war with regard to the cultural issues is won - look at the frequency of racist and homophobic violence.

[blondie58]

84. Bingo- you've hit it

that is exactly why Ron Paul is a bad idea. There is a need for government. Privatization is about profits for corporations, whereas government is just to meet the needs of the people.

I think, though as long as we have such huge corporate interests, there will not be a lot of research into stem cells. Big pharma will lose too much money.

On a personal note, feel free to pm me if you have any questions. Or, for that matter, your girlfriend is welcome to write me. I am practically an expert now on the subject. Best wishes to you and your girlfriend. I applaud you for your caring. I will never forget what my first neurologist said to me about so many men not being able to handle their wives illness and leaving them because of it.