(2007-11-06) — Congressman Ron Paul, D-TX, rocked the political world yesterday by raising more than $4 million in a single day as part of his revolutionary grassroots effort to fund his bid for a cabinet post in the next Republican presidential administration.
Rep. Paul has called for the abolition of the IRS, responsible monetary policy, elimination of government entitlement programs, protection of the nation’s borders and other measures designed to return to Constitutional governance and free market capitalism.
Political historians note that since serious presidential candidates don’t talk about such subjects, Rep. Paul has distinguished himself as a frontrunner for a cabinet post, like Secretary of the Treasury.
However, Rep. Paul insists he’s actually seeking the Republican nomination for president, despite his opposition to fighting terrorists overseas and his belief that radical Islam is not the driving force behind terrorism.
“I’m confident that if we pull out of Iraq at the beginning of my presidency,” said Rep. Paul, “we’ll have plenty of time to institute my domestic agenda before al Qaeda can plot another devastating attack on America. In any case, it’s worth a shot.”
24 responses so far ↓
1 camojack // Nov 6, 2007 at 8:34 am
Perhap$ I $hould run for publi¢ offi¢e…
2 Hawkeye // Nov 6, 2007 at 9:14 am
I’d give him a donation to go away…
3 Hawkeye // Nov 6, 2007 at 9:22 am
I have a cabinet we can put him in…
4 Maggie // Nov 6, 2007 at 10:26 am
Hmmmm……..Throws new light on the term “Mad Money”.
5 Maggie // Nov 6, 2007 at 10:29 am
BTW….. Good Morning Camo and Hawkeye!
6 conserve-a-tips // Nov 6, 2007 at 10:30 am
Well, no matter what, we can’t ignore that there are a lot of people out there who are fed up with the process and the politicians and want something different. And he’s differ’nt alright!
I just wish that there was a candidate who was down-to-earth, sensible, straight-talking and personable…oh wait…that would be Fred. But he looks old and he just isn’t organized. I do believe in miracles, though.
7 camojack // Nov 6, 2007 at 10:35 am
Maggie:
Guten morgen, leibchen!
8 boberinyetagain // Nov 6, 2007 at 11:01 am
hmmm, I may need to take a harder look at this man, sounds like just my type (and not in the airport mens room kind of way either)
9 gafisher // Nov 6, 2007 at 12:04 pm
“D-TX”
Heh. (-:
In fairness, while Ron Paul’s views on the war are insurmountable, his other positions are actually far more conservative than the rest of the current crop of Presidential hopefuls. Vowing to get us out of the U.N. almost makes up for thinking the terrorist issue would just go away by itself (but defense is the number one responsibility of Government; without that the rest is empty promises).
10 RedPepper // Nov 6, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Ron Paul should join forces with Dennis Kucinich. Think of the possibilities! A Paul-Kucinich Unity Ticket could consolidate the all-important Smurf vote, and sweep the country!
11 Hawkeye // Nov 6, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Good morning Maggie
12 everthink // Nov 6, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Ron Paul “Smurf” vote?
He’s the only Republican running who has something to say! However unlikely he is the only Republican who has the slightest chance.
But, after what you folks have done to the United States the Republican Party is OVER!
ET
PS
John Bolton is on Air America right now! How liberal is that?
13 everthink // Nov 6, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Fred opposes you on federal anti-abortion, and Terri Schiavo “Right to Life” legislation.
He sounds better than Bush on WOT as well; but “Bring Him On” anyway!
ET
14 rv // Nov 6, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Now why am I not surprised that ET thinks Paul is ok (for a Rethuglikkan)?
15 rv // Nov 6, 2007 at 6:36 pm
ahhhhhh!
I forgot a “k” . . . shoulda ended as kkKan
16 Effeminem // Nov 6, 2007 at 7:07 pm
I’m willing to sell out the Iraqis if it gets us a conservative president here at home. I honestly think that by 2009 Iraq will be capable of securing itself. It won’t be pretty, but it will happen.
Or we can vote for Giuliani, and get someone who will screw up the WOT even worse than Paul, plus support abortions for gay couples and increased Federal authority.
17 Beerme // Nov 6, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Paul’s an honest politician and his fund-raising feats should at least alert the other Republicans as to why they are no longer in power.
Of course ignoring the WOT is completely nuts, though we could steer clear of foreign entanglements much more than we have in the past twenty years or so (hey, wasn’t that kinda what Bush was promising in 2001?).
18 debass // Nov 6, 2007 at 10:21 pm
“(hey, wasn’t that kinda what Bush was promising in 2001?).” Yeah, and he promised we wouldn’t be attacked by anyone either. Bush lied.
He controls the action of everyone and everything in the whole world. He’s controlling me right now. Must drink, must drink.
19 Ms RightWing, Ink // Nov 6, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Ron Paul, Pat Paulson? I’m confused
20 debass // Nov 7, 2007 at 12:15 am
Ms RW,I
I thought it was RuPaul.
Fred’s going to win because he’s the tallest. Look at the height of the past Presidents compared to their opponents.
John Kerry didn’t win because he was from Easter Island and not really a US citizen. There are statues there of his ancestors.
21 Loki, E.NC.Z.B-K // Nov 7, 2007 at 2:10 am
Ya know, I read the guys profile, went to his website and everything. I loved everything I saw! I mean, he had so many sweet ideas for getting us back on track. Border security, law enforcement, shrinking federal government. I actually had goosebumps!
But then I had to read his foreign policy, specifically his thoughts on the WOT.
WHY PAUL!? You were so darn close!
Perhaps an acceptable Vice President, paired with someone who knows what this war means for Western Civilization’s survival?
But what do I know…?
22 Beerme // Nov 7, 2007 at 8:45 am
debass,
Maybe you don’t remember Bush making the lessening of foreign entanglements part of his original foreign policy platform, but he did. It was a solid contrast to Clinton’s “World Policeman” label, running around inserting US troops everywhere, under the control of UN commanders and such. It resonated pretty well with me and I voted for him in large part because of that stance. Of course I also voted for him because he said he was for fiscal restraint and tax relief. He got half of that right…
And yes, I’ll drink to that! But Bush made me do it.
23 debass // Nov 7, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Beerme,
Yes, I remember. The difference is the reason of national security. Clinton and the Dhimms will send troops everywhere as you said under UN but Bush only sent troops where necessary to protect our security. We should only send in troops when it’s in our national interest, and not when we are trying to distract from our grand jury testimony.
24 prettyold // Nov 9, 2007 at 10:12 pm
A statue from Easter Island walked into a bar and the bartender said,”Why the long face?”
You must log in to post a comment.