Let's not elect the guy who understands the economy and has proven it with an array of accurate predictions, because he seems nutty to people with media jobs.

Also, it's amazing to me that you can make a comment about Ron Paul being creepy when the video opens on Barney Frank, bar none the weirdest, creepiest, most revolting guy to ever serve in government.

Sadly, our country has been more interested in style than substance for at least the last 30 years. Ron Paul is probably the greatest patriot and political mind alive. He is also probably unelectable because he has a goofy grin and a whiny voice.

We get the government we deserve, sometimes.

I think his foreign policy ideas are disastrous, but the next President would be wise to make his/her absolute first priority to elect Paul as Treasury Secretary.

I'm with Feebie.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at August 15, 2011 9:49 AM

As am I. His foreign policy is a complete non-starter, but if the GOP is actually serious about economic reform and about saving this country, there needs to be a place for this guy in the Perry administration.

Perry and Paul don't like each other. At all.

If the gop nominates Perry, they will have handed that big eared idiot another term

1) Ron Paul is a racist, anti-semitic, isolationist xenophobe in the manner of Pat Buchanan.

2) Even his economic ideas are rubbish. Gold Standard? What's to stop Congress or the Fed from revaluing the dollar? A gold standard makes money illiquid, which halts economic growth.

3) If the GOP does not nominate a strong fiscal conservative, it won't matter. The Jug-Eared Fuck is done. He is, as the commenters at Ace like to say, "Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of miserable failure."

When talking about Ron Paul, I'm always reminded of the old myth Cassandra. The one cursed with truth and prophesy and never being believed.

With the way the main stream media portraiys people we will never have true choices.

Joe, it's not like that at all.

He's more the lunatic that happens to nail one prediction on one subject once. And the people who believe in that prediction form a cult of personality around him, and are completely blind to his other idiotic policy positions and his moral failings.

I disagree on his foriegn policy views. I'm not saying they aren't valid, but I don't think they would really work in the real world.

His economic policies are pretty much on target.

What just irritates me is the MSM declaring Bachman a big winner, but barely mentioning Ron Paul's second place. From HuffPo:

1. U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.): 4,823 votes


2. U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas): 4,671 votes


3. Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty: 2,293 votes


4. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.): 1,657 votes


5. Former Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain: 1,456 votes


6. Texas Governor Rick Perry: 718 votes


7. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney: 567 votes


8. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich: 385 votes


9. Former Utah governor Jon Huntsman: 69 votes


10. U.S. Rep Thad McCotter (R-Mich.): 35 votes

Notice that the difference (4,823 - 4,671) was 152 votes. But that doesn't matter. Bachman was the big winner, and Paul was an also ran.

Jim, in every online poll where Ron Paul is an option, he wins by a 3-1 margin. So nobody believes his place in any poll other than one that takes place in an actual ballot box. His supporters rig every single poll they can because they think that if they show huge numbers for Paul, people will come around to him because "everybody likes a winner".

Except we're already on to them, and we know Paul's a loser.

Why are Ron Paul's foreign policy views wrong? Ron Paul wants to end wars and cut the defense budget.

The facts of the matter are:

1. The US can no longer afford to be the world's policeman.
2. US military spending equals the next 9 countries combined.
3. US military spending nearly equals the whole rest of the world combined.

Those numbers do not include military spending hidden in other buckets.

Not only is he right about cutting military spending, his views on foreign policy are completely consistent with his other views.

1) Ron Paul is a racist, anti-semitic, isolationist xenophobe in the manner of Pat Buchanan.

Please point out the quotes for everything but the isolationist points of view. I don't want to quibble over the isolation. I want to know how he is a xenophobe? How about anti-semitic? How is he racist?

2) Even his economic ideas are rubbish. Gold Standard? What's to stop Congress or the Fed from revaluing the dollar? A gold standard makes money illiquid, which halts economic growth.

Where the fiat currency we have now does? An example of this is that a pre-1964 quarter is now worth about $8.50 as pure silver. For that amount, you could get a decent spaghetti dinner. A $1 gold coined in the early 1900's just on the gold content is now worth about $1,700. So if you have a dollar from 1975 -- could you still buy a full bag of candy? Or would you maybe get a 1/4 pound, if you're lucky?

3) If the GOP does not nominate a strong fiscal conservative, it won't matter. The Jug-Eared Fuck is done. He is, as the commenters at Ace like to say, "Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of miserable failure."

I suspect Obama would lose to a can of peas at this point. And I know many people who hate peas with a passion. ;-)

Except we're already on to them, and we know Paul's a loser.

And in what way is he a loser?

"What's to stop Congress or the Fed from revaluing the dollar? A gold standard makes money illiquid, which halts economic growth."

Just to add a little to Jim P's post...

This first sentence is WRONG, in that the ability of the market to revalue the dollar already exists, and that the policies of Congress and the Fed are already responsible for changes in value.

When somebody says, "Wow! Gold is up to $1800 an ounce!" - it really means, "Yuck. It takes $1800 to buy an ounce of gold now." That's the real truth. The utility of gold, as a substance that cannot be printed endlessly, is that it cannot be printed endlessly. The irony of this is that people who buy gold can't use it directly. McDonald's won't give them a Big Mac for a pound of it.

The second sentence is wrong, too, in that "growth" isn't impeded - inflation of the situation, of hype, is.

As Brazil discovered a few years ago when converting from the Cruziero, the value of currency depends on an illusion: public confidence in a printed marker, which represents a unit of value in labor or product.

And that's what the Administration and Congress are destroying.

@Radwaste - tell ya what... give me your pound of gol and I'll buy you **two** big macs