Paul Mauled

A couple of days ago, I posted “Marking Up the GOP’s 2012 Contenders,” my thoughts on what I believed to be the most viable Republican ticket to challenge Barack Obama in the next presidential election.

The response has been both amazing and troubling.  I didn’t reference Texas Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, an oversight that was neither intentional nor malicious.  I agree with most of Dr. Paul’s policies and philosophies and I wish more candidates had his passion for what he believes is right.  My omisson of him from the 2012 debate was based solely only electability on a national scale, not his politics.

Nonetheless, this omission led to a wave of comments launched from several Ron Paul websites and bulletin boards.  “NEED HELP Comments requested RON PAUL left out again!”  “They are already pulling this CRAP!” (“They?”)  I’ve included some of the more colorful ones below.

The point of my original post was to emphasize that to successfully contend for the presidency, the GOP needs someone who has enough electoral wherewithal to counter the Obama machine and its liberal network.  Despite the enthusiasm of his supporters, I just don’t believe Dr. Paul can do it.

In the 2008 Republican nomination for president, Ron Paul carried no states in the primaries or caucuses, finishing second in ten and third in 17.  Although these “place” and “show” numbers seem impressive, he only gathered 35 delegates, a mere 1.6% of the total.  To put THAT in perspective, Dr. Paul finished second to Mitt Romney (271 delegates/12.5%) who withdrew from the race after Super Tuesday – seven months before the September convention (Paul dropped out in June, the last challenger to McCain).  Mike Huckabee, the second place finisher (278/12.8%) left the race a month after Romney. 

Indeed, that was two years ago and, in politics, that’s a lifetime.  Since then, the Tea Party movement has swept the country and conservative ideals have enjoyed a resurgence.  And, true enough, a consistent run of polls show Ron Paul giving Barack Obama a very close race, some even having him polling better than the candidates I did include.  But, come election time, voter and media scrutiny will eat into those poll numbers.

For one thing, Dr. Paul is 75 and will be 77 during the 2012 election.  That’s eight years older than Ronald Reagan was when he became president.  I’m no “age-ist,” but that will matter to very many voters.  In 2008, Obama collected 66% of the 18-29 year old group and 68% of first time voters.  Paul is 26 years older than Obama whereas General Petraeus is only 9.

Further, Paul will be cast and castigated as a right-wing nut job, a fringe candidate and an extremist.  Naturally, the liberal-dominated media will attack him even more viciously than it has the Tea Party folks.  His followers will help paint him so.

Here are some of the comments from my previous post:

Dr. Ron Paul, my congressman is “the defender of the Constitution”. All those other dwads are just “puppets in waiting”.

We certainly do not need to continue to enable the CFR and it’s minions moving us toward a NWO.

Who owns this blog? Who makes the decision as to who gets on “the list”? The money changers who don’t know you and don’t care about you? or You?

Trends forecaster Gerald Celente predicted a year and a half ago that by 2012 families who have lost their jobs and homes will be squatting in abandoned shopping malls. And he also predicted a viable third party made up of former democraps and former repugnantcans. Celente’s predictions have a 90% rate of coming true.

Ron Paul will blow the field away in 2012 becuase enough American’s have figured out the NeoCon’s cowtow [sic] to the Globalists.

Petraeus is an empty fainting suite [sic].

Petraeus is a mindless tool of the industrial/military political establishment.

You sir are NO friend of Liberty.

The author of this blog is obviously a paid GOP hack

We all fully understand that no candidate can or should be held responsible for the words and actions of his/her supporters, but this kind of vitriol and name-calling will help Dems and their media minions make the case for marginalizing Paul in a general election

For a group of people who claim to cherish the military, the comments about General Petraeus are not just uncalled for, but stupid, distasteful and unpatriotic.

As for calling me “NO friend of Liberty” and “a paid GOP hack,” your ignorance is truly your defining trait.

But this isn’t about me, it’s about Ron Paul; a good man with great ideas and sterling principles.  As for being elected President of the United States, I don’t believe the American political environment in 2012 will favor him. 

Although what he stands for is timeless, Ron Paul’s time has gone.

Advertisements

22 thoughts on “Paul Mauled

  1. Wow, the way you admit to being a puppet of popular opinion is sad. So the media told you Ron Paul is unelectable and now you’re defending this popular “truth” as if it cannot be questioned. I’m so sorry you don’t have your own brain. Maybe you’d understand the popularity of freedom and the hope embodied in the ideas of our national heritage if it was explained to you in a language you understand. Here goes:

    Baaaa baaaa baaaa. (Chew on grass). Baaa baaa baaa

    Now do you understand it, sheeplehead?

    Like

    • Yeah… This is just what Ron Paul needs. So, dumb ass, when Dr. Paul gets elected, are you gonna have me sent to a gulag? I guess differing opinions are not acceptable to Paulists, huh?

      Like

      • What a truly ignorant reply. Remember, I’m the proponent of freedom and the protection of natural rights. I already respect your right to have a different opinion. No need to get Dr Paul elected to establish that fact.

        Just curious, what is the source of your victim complex? If my post made you feel like a helpless victim, I’m sorry. That wasn’t my intention.

        Like

        • Dude, what is wrong with you? Why resort to the name-calling? Do you honestly think calling somebody a “sheeplehead” is going to make them change their mind?

          I support Ron Paul’s views on a lot of things, especially his take on foreign policy. However, I see where C. Speight is coming from and you just proved his point about how easy it will be to marginalize Congressman Paul.

          Like

  2. Funny, you know a couple of months ago when Ron Paul won the CPAC straw poll, the right wing experts tried to downplay the accomplishment by saying, “Aww, it was just a bunch of kids who voted for him.” Fast forward a couple of months and now the right wing experts are telling us he’s too old to draw support of the young people. In fact, he’s the ONLY Republican candidate to have a large following amongst the young people. Here’s an exercise for you: go out to a college campus and see which candidate it is that excites them. It ain’t Romney.

    Like

  3. Most states have specialized license plates, right? How about political license plates? Maybe one that said Ron Paul 2012, or Ron Paul for President, or Vote Ron Paul.
    I would love to have an SC License plate that said “Ron Paul 2012”

    Like

  4. So the only reason that Dr. Paul is not on your list is because he is not electable. I’d be interested in hearing what you think makes someone electable.

    Also, you seem to agree with and like Dr. Paul, so why is it you can’t support him? Are you concerned with getting the right person elected, or are you concerned with making sure you are seen as being on the side of “the winning team”?

    We always have this back and forth between Dems and Reps. When the Dems are in power, the Reps seem to think they have to pull out all the stops to get the Dems out of power. So we will look for someone who has “elect-ability”. Same story on the other side.

    How about we do something original and elect someone who is right for the country instead of worrying about trying to beat the other team? If there has to be two sides, then I would say on one side you have millionaires who will say and do anything to increase their “elect-ability” and on the other side, you have the season ticket holders who just want to make sure their team “wins”.

    Is it any wonder why our country always seems to put the WRONG people in power?

    Ron Paul in 2012 is possible because unlike the author, I am unwilling to sacrifice my desire to vote for the right person just so I can feel good about myself for trying to pick “the winner”.

    Like

  5. “I will always vote what I have promised, and always vote the Constitution, as well as I will not vote for one single penny that isn’t paid for, because debt is the monster, debt is what’s going to eat us up and that is why our economy is on the brink.”
    by the Honorable Congressman Dr. Ron Paul

    Like

  6. No. It’s the GOP that done, if it doesn’t get back to the true constitutional principles of Dr. Paul. I expect you were among the fools who thought McCain/Palin were “electable.” Great track record for your future predictions.
    And for you to cherry-pick a few over-enthusiastic comments from among the overwhelming majority of positive,intelligent comments you received in support of Ron Paul reveals how little you tolerate free, independent thought and discussion.

    Like

  7. I ask the people who dismiss Ron Paul as a viable candidate for chief executive to be honest with themselves on one issue. What has changed between the current administration and that of the previous GOP administration? There is a reason Dr. Paul is painted as an extremist crackpot by the media and Washington insiders. That is because he represents a threat to the established power structure. He is a man of sound priciples and moral charecter that can not be purchased, so must be marginalized. Ask yourselves why is it that legislation drafted by him to audit the FED was chopped up and reorganized by members of both parties so that the end result was more power given to the same people it was intended to investigate. The sad truth is the people of America are being sold out by the very officials whose only mandate is to protect us. The global bussiness and energy intrests control our government this is a FACT. The only person in Washington who even seems to acknowledge this is Ron Paul. So cast your vote how you will, but understand the economy is not getting better, the warmongering is not abating, and civil liberties are rapidly becoming a thing of the past. This will not change as long as we allow the people who own EVERYTHING to dictate who is credible and who is not.
    “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society”-Krishnamurti

    Like

  8. This author is a douchebag. Ron Paul had such a small number of delegates and was votes because the mainstream media blacked him out.

    If he had been shown the same respect, and given the same time on the air and in the debates as any of the other candidates running, Republican or Democrat, then he would have made a huge impact on American politics.

    Not only was there a media blackout on the Ron Paul campaign in ’08, but the media and other candidates seemed to intentionally team up on, disrecpect, belittle, and outright slander Dr. Paul and his beliefs.

    With 80% of media owned by 5 or 6 companies, what do you expect? They automatically black-out anything that goes against their own corporate interests.

    And you are furthering the slanderous myths that he is a “right-wing nutjob”, a “fringe candidate”?

    Sickening . . .

    Like

  9. Ron Paul had such a small number of delegates and votes because the mainstream media blacked him out. * * * * TYPO * * * *

    Like

  10. They said, “Reagan is unelectable” in 1976. We saw how that turned out even though the establishment was NOT on his side. Paul is the first Goldwater conservative since Reagan to really stir up the GOP at the grassroots level. Do you not realize how many thousands of Goldwater styled Paul backers have flocked into the grassroots GOP and taken up party positions? Watch the 1964 convention when Goldwater ROCKED that establishment weasel Rockefeller. Watch the grassroots delegates shouting and blowing air horns as they overturned the establishment elitists. The establishment is scared and they should be.

    It only takes a small tireless minority to eventually win.

    Like

  11. Every one of you Paul supporters posting here had better be involved in the GOP and working on getting elected as national delegates to the convention and otherwise becoming part of the infrastructure necessary to nominate Ron Paul.

    If not, you’re part of the problem you’re complaining about.

    Like

  12. The only person who would actually change anything in Washington is an outsider like Ron Paul. Corporatism and Big Government corruption is DESTROYING us! These industrial complexes are wrecking small business in America. Entrepreneurs & small business owners have made the US the great country it is–they are the heart and soul of the US. The same goes for China! Their leaders get it, and that’s why they are prospering, our leaders have forgotten it, and that’s why we are FAILING!

    Bill Gates was an entrepreneur, but now he’s a George Soros socialist just like the rest of them. How many American corporations and billionaires give to the candidate that backs small business? I’ll tell you, NONE! Because they HATE competition!

    Ron Paul is the small business candidate and this is why the corporate owned media wants to destroy him.

    It basically comes down to this, you either stand with small business owners via Ron Paul or you stand with the corporate elites via the RINOs & Neo-cons.

    Like

  13. Thanks for the explanation and thanks for including my comment “You sir are No friend of Liberty” as being one of the “colorful” comments. And I am also glad that you did read all the comments.

    It is ironic that you say that the GOOD doctor is un-electable for the reasons that you give. What makes it ironic is that YOU are perpetuating the very “myth” with your own words.

    Stop saying it. It’s that simple.

    You are regurgitating the media hacks verbage who support the GOP hacks you listed. It’s ridiculous.

    It appears to me that you like alot of what Dr. Paul stands for and yet you find that he is not worth voting for because he cannot win. I remember hearing this line of thinking during the campaign.

    It made no sense to me now and it makes no sense to me then.

    Dr. Ron Paul is a good and honorable man who legislates ALWAYS with the Constitution in mind – ALWAYS. He upholds his oath of office. NO ONE else out of 535 members of CONgress do that.

    Why cannot you stand behind a good man who CAN win instead of complimenting the hacks? As I said and questioned in my earlier thread:

    “So by omitting him in your list you have shown your belief that people should vote for crap because
    the one true statesman who could truly lead this country does not have chance.”

    Please stop re-gurgitating the myth that Dr. Ron Paul is NOT electable because he is.

    He most definitely IS!

    Like

Comments are closed.