The American Mind

Please don’t become a sad, shrill little man.

Even while acknowledging the obvious, measurable impact of the Ron Paul campaign, your deafness leads you to the gutless criticism that it’s being backed by “fiat currency.”

A criticism that, for it’s self-evident truth, applies to Mr. Thompson (as well as all other candidates.)

Better to say nothing, and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt, Mr. Hack(barth).

“So congratulations to all the Paul backers out there. You’ve advanced online campaigns one step further. Some of us are looking at how you did it.”

Thanks.

All it takes is a believable messenger with the right message.

Thanks for the props. Some of you will be looking at how we win this election too Keep in mind that the campaign was not officially involved with this, did not promote it except for a few sentences in a speech a few days ago, and spent $0 getting all these people to donate on this day.

Here’s how we did it: we back a candidate who is honest, follows the Constitution, and is consistent with following his principles, in both his public and private life. We choose someone who does not pander to the crowds with pre-approved soundbites, and we choose someone who appeals to those of all political parties and ages, even those who have never voted before.

We choose someone who is the best supporter of the military, with a military record of his own and the most military donations to any campaign. We choose someone who actually reads those pesky Congressional bills and 9/11 Commission Reports and who actually returns money to his congressional office each year.

We choose to support Ron Paul.

That’s how we do it.

A candidate is part of it, but there have been previous candidates who have garnered as much claims of being principles. Back in 1996 I was an Alan Keyes fan and tried organizing Wisconsin for him. His campaign didn’t generate this kind of heat.

Still, I see no sign of the internet and financial support turning into electoral success. But I could be wrong.

I’m from the Netherlands and I would have donated if I was allowed to. And it is not just me, people from all over the world are hoping that Ron Paul becomes president of the USA.

Due to my work I have contact with hundreds of people from across Europe. And guess what? They all hate the US at this moment. They hate the example that this mighty country is setting, and they hate the EU that is erroding our own individual national liberties. They talk bad about America, American politics and the American people. I felt the same, untill I stumbeled upon Ron Paul and his supporters. Especially these grassroot efforts like november 5th give new hope to us Europeans. We feel Americans are setting an example that we might be able to follow. If Ron Paul gets elected, the world can change, and our perception of the USA can and will change from hating a super agressive moronic rutheless state, to a state that sets a good example.

ps. you better look around you and learn the thruth about terrorism: it is all about blowback. if terrorists would really hate freedom my country would have been bombed to pieces… why?
we are the real land of the free: you can smoke weed here without being arrested, we have redlight districts, we have gaymarriage and openly gayparades, we have sex on tv and naked women and naked men on tv at prime, and above all: we put mayonesse on our fries.

Wow. They are really on the prowl tonight.

I just think that there are two kinds of people who are really interested in the election this far out: (1) political junkies, and (2) those who, um, have interesting points of view and are open to extreme possibilities.

I’ve been hoping all along that I’m more the former than the latter. But who knew the latter had such high balances on their debit cards? Even if their irony meters are sometimes a bit miscalibrated . . .

The time for serious candidates will come. But it is not their moment quite yet.

“A candidate is part of it, but there have been previous candidates who have garnered as much claims of being principles. Back in 1996 I was an Alan Keyes fan and tried organizing Wisconsin for him. His campaign didn’t generate this kind of heat.”

All politicians claim to have principles– few actually do. Even Ron Paul’s opponents admit he has principles. I really don’t consider Alan Keyes to have too many principles soundly based on the Constitution or appealing to those of all political parties, and that’s an odd example to put it mildly. In fact, quite the opposite… I lived in Illinois during his Senate campaign, and there were Republicans who went to the Democratic side in droves because he is very unappealing as a Senator, let alone a President.

Jordan? That last quote, back atcha. Otherwise, the word “delusional” comes to mind.

Sean, where’s Paul’s money going to go when he’s officially out of the running?

[...] 6th, 2007 · No Comments H/T to Sean Hackbarth at The AmericanMind. [...]

Back in 1996 I was an Alan Keyes fan and tried organizing Wisconsin for him.

OK, wtf. Alan Keyes is about 5000% more “unhinged” and “wacky” than Ron Paul could ever hope to be. Should have kept that one under lock and key, Sean…your credibility when it comes to using the ol’ “insanity” dismissal for those you disagree with has taken a hit.

I’d put even money on Ron Paul running as an independent if he doesn’t get the Republican nomination. If that happens, the eventual GOP nominee had better be scared and expecting some Nader-esque spoiler action denting his vote count.

DJ makes an excellent point. While running third party is not as appealing as a major, I think that Dr. Paul could do it if he doesn’t get in this time. First of all, the Republican Party is stone-cold crazy for not welcoming him with open arm– he’s the only candidate increasing in popularity, and he’s the only one bringing in young voters and their money at this point, which is critical to the future of any Republican Party. I attended a majority-Republican event, the Defending the Dream Summit, and all the young people there were for Ron Paul. An older gentleman told me that he thought Ron Paul made the most sense of anyone who gave speeches (and all the candidates had spoken), and he said he was glad my friends and I were having fun with getting involved in the Republican Party. THAT’s the attitude the Republicans need to take, or they will die a slow and painful death with no young people involved.

I tend to agree with DJ. I think Paul will run 3rd party and Nader running 3rd party as well. This could be the screwiest election since 1860.

he Republican Party is stone-cold crazy for not welcoming him

I 100% agree, and i’m saying that as someone who tends to fall on the more liberal end of the political spectrum.

That the Republican establishment is trying its best to ignore (or dismiss as “crazy”) the candidate that most accurately reflects the ideals of conservatism is evidence that the modern GOP (and, for that matter, the Democratic party) doesn’t care about ideals as much as they care about power, money, and holding on to both. It’s a sad state, as i honestly do believe that conservative ideals are at times better suited to deal with specific problems than liberal ideals (both have their place, which i suppose makes me a neo-moderate, but whatever), but it’s patently obvious that the GOP machine wants nothing to do with real conservatism, as it runs anathema to the most conservative candidate out there.

Heck, the evidence is right here in Sean’s blog. Merely because Ron Paul opposes the (illegal, unconstitutional, and misguided) War in Iraq, all of Paul’s conservative creds get wiped under the table. Conservatism isn’t as important as war and the profiteering off war when it comes to the GOP. If i recall, one could go back into the TAM archives and find comments from Sean and his Republican readers claiming that Paul’s candidacy is nothing but internet bluster and that he’d disappear from the running soon enough. But guess what? Paul’s fundraising was a top story on MSNBC.com today. Sean and the rest of the GOP pundits claim that Paul would vanish quietly when his lack of funds became too big a hurdle has been exposed as flat-out wrong. Money talks, and he’s raking it in–beating many of the GOPers at their own game, and with solid conservative ideals!

Mind you, it’s unlikely that i’ll vote for him (his anti-abortion stance strikes me as based in a creepy religious fervor rather than strict constitutionalism), but Ron Paul’s candidacy is good for the GOP (whether they like it or not) and good for America. If he runs as a third party candidate, it’ll be even better for America. The two-party system has strangled intelligent, multifaceted discourse in this country for long enough. Viable 3rd party candidates on both the liberal and conservative ends of the spectrum would really make America a great place to care about politics again.

DJ – I agree that Paul will almost certainly make a 3rd party run. He’s not going to win the primary, despite his fundraising and his loyal internet following.

Paul’s fundraising should be an important story – it’s a huge step forward in the “viral candidacy” concept.

I differ that he’s a “conservative”. He’s about the closest candidate we’ve ever had to a true Libertarian; he falls on the conservative side of the Libertarian spectrum, but there’s plenty of views he has that are anathema to conservatives.

At the end of the day, however, his currency views will sink whatever momentum he gathers for the GOP nomination. Iraq’s becoming a near meaningless campaign issue (heck, even Zakaria has figured that out), and the economy will become a key driver. There’s no way voters will want to undergo the sure pain that his currency plan entails once they come remotely close to understanding it.

At the end of the day, however, his currency views will sink whatever momentum he gathers for the GOP nomination.

You’re probably very right about that.

I differ that he’s a “conservative”. He’s about the closest candidate we’ve ever had to a true Libertarian

Well, true, but on the social end of things, where many Libertarians come off as liberal due to their “let everyone do what they will” philosophy, Paul’s come across to me as more socially conservative than most Libertarians thanks to what appears to be pretty devout Christian faith. Like i said before, some of his views, while supposedly coming from a strict constitutionalist view, seem more fueled by religion, and that makes me uncomfortable. That’s just my take, though, and i welcome any more information anyone has on his individual positions…

Alan Keyes? ALAN F-ING KEYES?!?! Are you serious? Marvin the frickin Martian himself? Wow. Just wow. Now, in my mind, you have no credibility when it comes to politics. None at all. Just wow. Really? Alan Keyes?