65 votes

Doherty: For the Ron Paul Wing, Now What?

This is a very good article.

By Brian Doherty | NY Times
June 21, 2012
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has admitted that he won’t have enough delegates at the Republican National Convention in Tampa in August to win the nomination.

But right after that announcement he racked up another win: his supporters now make up the majority of the delegation from the caucus state of Iowa. That’s the state allegedly “won” by Mitt Romney in January, which was later revealed to have been “won” by Rick Santorum.

Paul’s campaign has risen from many deaths. In mid-May, he announced he’d no longer campaign in upcoming primary states. He encouraged his forces to concentrate on caucus states, where dedication to a long process of local, district and state party meetings can trump just getting a mass of voters out on primary day to dutifully record a vote for the frontrunner.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Make best efforts to get Paul in and if that fails

Than we vote Gary Johnson, hes not Paul but hes close enough and has the principles. because you can't write most of the time.

I agree that Brian Doherty

I agree that Brian Doherty did say it well.

"Ron Paul antiwar appeal won him friends on the left, but it was also why this politician with impeccable credentials on core Republican issues like taxes (he wants to eliminate the income tax), spending (he’s the only Republican candidate with a budget that balanced in three years with no new taxes), and regulation (he thinks they strangle the wealth-creating properties of free markets) had such a hard time gaining traction with the Tea Party base, who don’t see the connection Paul sees between a constitutionally limited, affordable government and a less expansionist foreign policy.

If the Tea Party really were transpartisan outsiders dedicated to fighting bailouts and shrinking spending, Ron Paul should have been their man. In 2012, they’ve revealed themselves more as loyal Republicans than as a rebel army. Paul’s campaign is trying to gently guide the Paul movement through that same transition."

The Tea Party was transitioned into being loyal republicans and the guys like Benton, Hunter, Tate, and Rand Paul want to transition the Ron Paul revolution into being loyal republicans. Well said, Brian. I think the plan is idiotic, but I do see this plan trying to be developed.

You can already

See the divide the neocons are causing in the liberty movement. It is a shame.

"But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing." - Andrew Jackson

Romney is more dangerous than Obama.


By Sen. Rand Paul
June 19, 2012

Rand says: I do not yet know if I will find a Romney presidency more acceptable on foreign policy. But I do know that I must oppose the most recent statements made by Mitt Romney in which he says he, as president, could take us to war unilaterally with Iran, without any approval from Congress. Romney`s exact words were:

"I can assure you if I’m president, the Iranians will have no question but that I will be willing to take military action if necessary to prevent them from becoming a nuclear threat to the world. I don’t believe at this stage, therefore, if I’m president that we need to have a war powers approval or special authorization for military force. The president has that capacity now.`

Romney relishes the thought of all that POWER in HIS hands. Romney is NOT a smart man. Rather he is a small man who loves to wield power in any way he can.

God help America if he wins the presidency. Romney at the helm of still the most powerful nation!

Ron Paul for President, please!

Way to go Rand. This will keep you busy. :)

Rand Paul is simply following

Rand Paul is simply following his father's footsteps, and is becoming a professional about being two different things to two different groups of people.

I'm not sure why he is treated as so different from his father or any kind of traitor.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"


That i true. Alex said himself that there are two Ron Pauls. The one we know is what he calls the internet Ron Paul, he talks tough, gets firey a bit and sounds like one mean fighting machine. Then the main stream TV Ron is a bit sheepish and not as tough. I believe what Alex said is true, it is like Paul puts on a show for his internet supporters because he knows we hardly watch TV, especially the news. I don't think he meant it in a negative light, not entirely. But it can't be denied, Paul was playing two roles.

"But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing." - Andrew Jackson

I think it's kind of a

I think it's kind of a negative spin, actually.

You always want to engage your audience. On the internet his audience is different than TV. It's totally unsurprising that he'd be a little different in approach in the two mediums. He's not really into selling himself so much as libertarian ideas, so I'd say that's a very positive and smart way to go. It's part of why he's able to reach a lot of different, and very diverse people. I think it's about nudging people in the right direction within their own world, so to speak.

I really liked when Ron Paul gave the whole "nudge nudge wink wink" tip of the hat to the book "How To Win Friends and Influence People" in an interview question that some of his supporters are a bit "abrasive". That's a great book to read, especially for a Libertarian, even though it's not necessarily a Libertarian book most people recommend. I would consider it Libertarian, because it's all about how to use diplomacy, psychology, and positive action to achieve your goals and win people over to your way of thinking, rather than use of coercion, negativity, etc. . .

I'd go so far as to say there

I'd go so far as to say there are three Ron Pauls. I don't think he has a choice. He has to be a social conservative for his local district and a libertarian hero for his national followers, plus a constitutional conservative for his national Republican base. The Sam Stein interview perfectly illustrated how he is able to portray himself at all three semi-contradictory things in a single sentence or paragraph. "As adamament as I am about purity of philosophy, I'm very pragmatic." He says "I've never voted for an earmark in my life." And then he dutifully goes home and brags about all of the bacon he's broght home. It's amazing to behold how he has managed to have it two or three ways on a lot of really difficult topics, such as flag burning, immigration, abortion, gay marriage, etc, etc, making every audience feel like they're getting what they want.

I think he has a reputation as a philosophical purist, but it's an entirely unexamined one. To me, he's just a good politician with some good ideas. But a politician in every respect.

Many of the Paul fans say that Johnson has a soft core philosophy and that is true. He's not a hard core libertarian. But I would argue that it's a single core, whereas Ron is able to be a three hard core purists in one, and you just need to know which one you're talking to at any given moment.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

I say, any lover of liberty

*oops. I was actually replying to that "go back to your boss" comment. Seriously dude, that's not the attitude to have if you want to see any amount of success*

I say, any lover of liberty is an ally, so long as they practice what they preach. I don't have to agree with every single thing someone does or says, or even agree with the motivation behind it to see it as a net positive. I think that really, instead of trying to act like this guy or that guy is going to save us, we need to realize the entire point which all of these guys are peddling. It's not about them. It's about the message. We support them because they might further liberty, but at the end of the day, everyone is human, and we all have the same goal, which is an increase of freedom.

I have no patience for "More Libertarian Than Thou". It's not constructive, IMO.

When government is down to

When government is down to the size of the Constitution and we are free from overly oppressive taxation and regulation, we can start to get really picky. At this point, it's hard to believe that there are people who are demanding more government and more regulation.

Did you know there are over 8000 new regulations made in the US every year? www.regulations.gov

A Commenter's Checklist

View Tips for More Effective Commenting
Regulations With Comments Due Soon

Next 3 Days(59)
Next 7 Days(174)
Next 15 Days(402)
Next 30 Days(741)
Next 90 Days(1,112)
Newly Posted Regulations

Last 3 Days(198)
Last 7 Days(486)
Last 15 Days(1,061)
Last 30 Days(1,969)
Last 90 Days(6,215)

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

Go back to your boss

Go back to your boss Alex Jones & Co.
We don't have time for your garbage.

I'm not even sure if I know

I'm not even sure if I know who that is. Is he the guy that intervied Gary Johnson the other day for a radio program?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

He's a Libertarian

He's a Libertarian Talk-radio/internet host. He has kind of a dramatic/angry style with a gravely voice and often goes on rants on the air. Some people take that sort of thing the wrong way and pin him as some wacko, but really, he's got to engage his radio audience, and sitting there like an NPR host doesn't make for good radio in that format. He's not perfect, of course, but nobody is. He's definitely woken a lot of people up to Libertarian ideas, the Constitution, etc. . . and he breaks a lot of very good news that nobody will touch with a 10ft pole. He also has very good interviews that ask very hard hitting questions.

Sounds like Bob Beckl or that

Sounds like Bob Beckl or that other guy on MSNBC or CNN. Except not a Democrat.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

The point is this...

The reason for all the R&R Paul bull is by its nature there to remind us that just like Washington who refused to be King so does Ron refuse to be our savior........this is a revolution of the people by the people about the right of one person that two can't vote away, well at least I hope don't need a leader that's the point I think....collectively our body of minds and techmology will force the camera on all imbalances mental and monetary

From the freedom of one comes freedom for all

Simple choice

My position is simple. The RNC and the DNC worked together to steal my social security funds that I have spent years paying in without a choice and they took that money and spent it on their own petty political projects without permission. Till the day I die I will not vote democrat or republican again because they BOTH stole from me and a lot of other citizens. I considered voting for the RNC candidate till the RNC showed themselves to be equally corrupt to the DNC. Now, if Paul is not the nominee I will return to third party voting just like I voted for Barr after the RNC dissed Ron Paul 4 years ago. I never watch Fox news or MSNBC. They are BOTH liars. So my choice really IS simple, Ron Paul or third party. I may not aqree with all of Gary Johnson's positions on everything but at least Libertarians did NOT steal my money like the two mainstream parties did. Simple.


I Also don't agree with Doherty's comments about the lawyers for liberty and the lawsuit.
First, I heard Dr. Paul say that if we have evidence of vote fraud WE should do something about it. He wished SOMEBODY WOULD. And then he said he didn't have time, he was busy trying to stop a war. Well, we have plenty of evidence, and Dr Paul knows it.

Common sense tells us that it is not Dr. Paul who has to initiate this. These are OUR rights being violated, we had better start fighting for them--this is what the liberty movement is about. And, Hopefully this will take us further than just the primaries. Just suppose Ron Paul got nominated, then what? We trust our voting machines?? Wake up people!! Bev Harris has been the Lone Ranger on this for as long as Ron Paul has been in congress???? Vote fraud has been going on forever, but our voting system sucks. It's about time we do something about it. I think we have the worst voting system in the WORLD and I'm not exaggerating. The sad thing is we just put up with it, election after fraudulent election.

The best thing that happened so far in this election is that these lawyers got together (THANK YOU ALL) and are trying for us. Why should we be cheated out of nominating our president. Ron Paul is the peoples choice and the republican party is systematically blocking us out.
Should we let them? If Romney thinks he really Won---I don't get it. He's like a 10 year old boy.

I posted this comment at the article

Let's see if the Times will approve it!

"There are now and always have been two fundamental forces at work among humans. Collectivism and Individualism.
There are many belief systems, or ideologies, that blend certain features and mindsets of each. Grab a name; social conservative, liberal, anarchist, Nazism, Fascism, socialist, communist, libertarian, progressivism... or what have you, they are all a blend of the two or purists of one or the other.
The Founders were what I and maybe others call rational individualists. Regardless of your term for them or views of them, they were certainly not anarchists (absolute individualists), as in advocates for no government at all. They certainly did believe that limited government indeed was needed, but warned over and over and over again in all their words and writings that our republic would be a challenge to keep to its limited role. Remember B. Franklin's famous response, "...if you can keep it"?
Enlightened men created it and it will be only enlightened citizens who will restore it!
I strongly recommend reading the free online copy of "The Law" by Frederic Bastiat - ASAP. The proper role of lawful government is well defined in this 1850 work and simply must be read to understand the non-anarchist, individualist's reasonings and attitudes. It is the anti-thesis to the Communist Manifesto of which a better title would be the Collectivist Manifesto for its "love affair" with government force and control over everything.

The Law: http://www.fee.org/pdf/books/The_Law.pdf "

O U R P L A N = R O N P U A L (Coinsidence? I think not.)

Kyle Bass

A friend forwarded this... Incredibly long, but worth a watch, especially around 11 min. This guy isn't a RP supporter per se, but, gives insight from someone in the game and succeeding...


The original vimeo video is

The original vimeo video is here:



Yeah, that was.... harrowing.

It is one thing...

To know that we are screwed, but to actually put the numbers in a chart and see/hear clearly why, it is indeed harrowing.

Indeed. But Ron Paul's plan

Indeed. But Ron Paul's plan to cut the spending by $1 trillion in a year was deemed too extreme (as was his son's plan to cut half that much) so we're going to march right into that brick wall.

Doherty is MSM

Dougherty is not really on our side. He pulls all the MSM punches and dismissals of Dr. Paul, while trying to appear as a supporter of the good Dr. He is not. I realize he needs to be objective, but I have asked him questions and heard his answers to other people. He is a snake in the grass IMO.

Rand Paul is of no consequence

Fuck Rand Paul. I'll never support him, wouldn't support him for a position as a school crossing guard.

"Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist." ~Jacob Halbrooks

Without his father's supporters....

...the the reasons for that support, constitutional government and non-intervention, he would never have been elected.

Yes, but...

Rand's votes have been 98%+ on target and he gets very high marks for his defense of liberty and the Constitution. As long as his voting record and public statements remain the same I will continue to stand by him even while he "maneuvers" for greater political influence with larger audiences.
Being picky is one thing, being foolish is another. Keep working to elect better reps into Congress over those who are clearly Oath breakers and the fangs of collectivism will eventually be pulled!

O U R P L A N = R O N P U A L (Coinsidence? I think not.)

98% on target?

Depends on where you stand doesn't it....

If his Iran vote leads to war he is 98% off target.

His domestic policies are fine but his lack of leadership, insight and knowledge on a non-interventionist foreign policy is glaring.

Though criticizing drones over US air space he does not do the same for those in other countries. He appears instead to support a 'constitutional' American empire.

What about that amendment

he put into the sanctions bill?
You didn't like that?
It was gonna pass anyway at 99-1, even if he voted against it.
Even if he filibustered, they had enough for cloture.
There was literally NOTHING he could do to stop it.


Nothing? Many of us support Ron Paul precisely because he is willing to be the one 'No' vote. It matters.