Comments on: Why Isn’t Ron Paul Taken More Seriously?

By: Jim S

Jim S — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 04:59:27 +0000

Inclusive? Well, to all the well off libertarian conservative Christians I suppose he seems that way. Or to the hopelessly ignorant.

By: wgadget

wgadget — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:46:35 +0000

I was a neocon myself up until May 9, 2007, the day I discovered Congressman Ron Paul. His message is awe-inspiring, mind-opening, and inclusive.

I think the main reason that he is not being taken seriously is that the media does not take him seriously. It becomes more obvious with every passing day that the media is corrupt.

Here is a short, current example, less than one minute long. Fox News should be ashamed.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sJkfVdMEx5k

For more information on Ron Paul, go to http://www.ronpaullibrary.org.

By: Jim S

Jim S — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:17:54 +0000

It’s funny that J.Franklin thinks that the views I pointed out will do anything to win Ron Paul a general election.

By: aaron

aaron — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:09:35 +0000

Jimmy that was funny.

By: readit

readit — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:01:58 +0000

Response to Jim S. Read the articles by Dr. Paul. So what>? Under the title war on religion, he explains how maybe baning christmas ornaments on public property is taking it a bit too far in seperation of church and state. The Founders intent was to keep a national church from taking over the government (ie church of England). You make it out like those articles are a liablity, but in each article he goes back to the constitution as his base. If all politicians in D.C. did we wouldnt have all the problems we have today. He’s a christian and believes in God whats wrong with that? Even better he wont force the government to make you do something you dont want to do, even pay taxes on your blood and sweat (labor).

By: Jimmy the Dhimmi

Jimmy the Dhimmi — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:05:44 +0000

This just in: Ron Paul wins another online poll! this one is even more influential than the fox news debate poll. Click here.

By: aaron

aaron — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:58:16 +0000

Don’t forget the laughing from Giuliani or someone each time before and after he began speaking. No the attempts to bury Paul are becoming more overt and less justified by any stretch.

David: the “implications” of Paul’s suggested policies (btw he’s running for president not dictator) are the same as Reagan and Goldwater. They are debatable and legitimate. Most are certainly not as radical as the Bush preemption policy or the patriot act when you reflect on even only the last 50 years of our history.

Paul is neither accepted mainstream nor establishment which invariably is one and the same. This is the reason for the effort to at one time snub and which now has become a tortured effort to sideline Ron Paul.

It is becoming beyond ridiculous as I listen to Diane Rehm’s show on NPR this morning and a commentator discussing Huckabee saying something to the effect that Huckabee “resoundingly trounced…[feigned struggle]..what’s his name…I can never remember.”

This country and its media (professionals) can do better.

By: Why Isn’t Paul Taken More Seriously? » The Moderate Voice

Why Isn’t Paul Taken More Seriously? » The Moderate Voice — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:53:58 +0000

[...] Why isn’t Ron Paul taken more seriously and… is there a coordinated attack going on against the Congressman from Texas? [...]

By: grace

grace — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:12:48 +0000

Ron Paul wins another debate with his moral genius. I will be voting for the only traditional conservative in the race. I will be voting for Ron Paul in 2008!

By: Why Isn’t Paul Taken More Seriously? « The Van Der GaliÃ«n Gazette

Why Isn’t Paul Taken More Seriously? « The Van Der GaliÃ«n Gazette — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:01:11 +0000

[...] 7th, 2007 by Michael van der GaliÃ«n Why isn’t Ron Paul taken more seriously and… is there a coordinated attack going on against the Congressman from [...]

By: DAC

DAC — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 12:50:44 +0000

The US House of Representatives is not, and has never been, a good platform to run for President. Members roots tend to be parochial, reflecting the district of representation. One of 465 doesn’t give one the visibility of one of fifty (govs) or the Senate. The detailed legislative and representative experience gined/mastered by a successful re-elected House Member is far from the executive experience one needs for the Presidency (Govs have such experience and the Senate historically has also not been a good springboard). Congressman Paul is “trapped”, so to say, by his experience and circumstances.

By: L.Chattanooga

L.Chattanooga — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 12:49:30 +0000

I use to like Colmes, but i now realize they are both dumb asses, If it was Giuliani,or Romney that won the cell poll we wouldn’t have heard a word about it.
I just love how Ron has gotten the Fox crowd scared, thats why they have to bash him for being Intelligent and passionate about what he and a-lot of American people believe !!!!Go Ron Paul!!!

By: KSH

KSH — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 11:09:42 +0000

Sliepner: We are tired of listening to the lies and the conservative rhetoric of the members of the Council on Foreign Relations who are behind a lot of the messes going on – Edwards and Obama both are also members. Go to the CFR.org website and see this organization is not just a conspiracy theory, and read their fellows in the news section, where Romney and Fred Thompson are highlighted at times. Hillary, too. The media membership is enormous. They are all on the same team. We want to get our news from unfiltered sources and our candidates for any public office take an oath to uphold the US Constitution, but only few are taking their oath seriously, like Ron Paul is. The CFR is called unbiased, but it greatly influenced Democratic and Republican ideas time and again. And NOT to our country’s betterment nor in adherence of its constitution.

By: sleipner

sleipner — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 07:49:43 +0000

Because he’s a whacked out fruitcake that has less chance of winning the presidency than I do?

Seriously, I don’t know what all the fuss is about this guy. Anyone sane listening to him would assume he’s got a lockerfull of guns and grenades in his basement, and 3 years of nonperishable foodstuffs. If he gets elected president I think it would be almost as bad of a disaster as Bush has been.

I feel your pain in thinking neither party will do anything but propagate the lobbyist-owned government, but this guy just wants to dismantle the government and replace it with anarchy. Please look to people like Edwards, and to a lesser extent Obama who are trying to be their own people rather than selling out to the corporate lobbyists.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 07:34:07 +0000

I can give you the EXACT reason in one word - the reason Ron Paul isn't taken more seriously: Lolrons!

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:10:59 +0000

If Ron Paul doesn’t win the Republican nomination, then he can still run as an independent. However, until then, we should attempt to get him nominated as a Republican, it’d be easier Paul v. Democrat(x) because Ron Paul is the only candidate who will end the war, which is what people want. If it’s Paul v. Democrat(x) v. Republican (x), it might be harder for him to win the general election.

By: Sid Davis

Sid Davis — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:10:50 +0000

I think the reason Ron Paul is not more popular is that he is preaching a message of freedom; while the public gives lip service to freedom, it really is not a very popular idea.

You can’t have big government and freedom. The left wants big government control of the economy because they do not trust that they would be successful in a free, competitive economy. Those at the receiving end of economic privilege do not want to be forced to earn what they would get without the help of laws rigging the economy in their favor. The moral right wants big government control of personal behavior because they do not trust that others or they themselves will control their own behavior.

Only a small minority want freedom and the responsibility that goes with it, so it is nice to see Ron Paul advocating freedom, but he won’t get too far in the political game.

By: J. Franklin

J. Franklin — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:04:02 +0000

I agree with Jim S on one thing at least, visit LewRockwell.com to read some of Ron Paul’s writings as well as what others (such as Mr. Rockwell himself) are writing about Ron Paul. I guarantee, you will not be disappointed. You will, however, be more informed and most likely very impressed by Dr. Paul and his Constitutionally based positions. I know I was when I stopped by there.

Thanks for helping out there, Jim S, keep spreading the word!

By: Greg J.

Greg J. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:26:56 +0000

Two things:

1. There once was a time when I actually liked Sean Hannity. :(

2. The GOP is on life support. If the Republicans don’t have the wisdom to nominate Ron Paul, the GOP is dead.

By: not hannitized

not hannitized — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:06:05 +0000

start keeping track of this guys misstatements. He is reaming Paul and has not even had paul on his show although he did it for ALL the other Neocon Repubs and even some of the Dem Cadidates!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inaccurate_claims_or_bias_of_Sean_Hannity#Instances_of_Bias