September 11, 2008

Ron Paul on the Colbert Report - enjoy!

Too bad Ron Paul didn't have the courage to mount an independent bid this year. He had the people. We gave him the money.

Someone must have got to him.


I'm disappointed in Paul personally, but I'm still inspired by his message. Maybe one day America, and the GOP, will be smart enough to listen.

Don't bet on it though.

10 comments:

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

Someone must have got to him.

Yep - the knowledge that he'd be giving a free pass to Obama by running.

Edgar Alpo said...

Jesse Ventura for prez.

Anonymous said...

it's very hard to run as an independent
if you don't start the registrations a year out.

most states have rigorous petition requirements.

perhaps if he ran both as a libertarian and a
republican he might have had a chance.

now he could have played nader and just
ran in VA, NH, IN, OH, MI. Screw up McCain

wiserenter said...

Because the system is rigged so Independents can't win and RP knoes it!

Anonymous said...

He didn't have dick for people. Why don't you just accept that he's a loon, the majority of the American people don't like fruitcakes, and you are too much of a child to realize that people who disagree with you are not stupid or fostering some hidden agenda?

Grow up! Thanks for the entertainment, though. Good bye.

Steve said...

Keith, I understand why you like Ron Paul. It's nice to see someone in power admitting we have problems.

Thanks to you, I took a good look at Paul -- his writings, his web site. I felt his solutions were off base. Also, Ron Paul was a terrible messenger. It's too easy to ignore someone who sounds like him. He comes off as shrill and panicked instead of well reasoning.

IMO, you need another hero. Perhaps it's Obama. At least he also doesn't take Pac/lobbyist money, so he can be his own man. Time will tell and we should only have modest expectations.

Anonymous said...

Ross Perot for...Oh, never mind.

Anonymous said...

An independent candidate would have to be full blown billionaire, private security, lots of ad money, and the ability to blackmail established millionaire senators and party members to be able to successfully run. In essence, it would be a vicious person, a psychotic version of Bruce Wayne who would essentially make people, who opposed him, disappear. I don't think think I'd want such a megalomaniac for President. Yes, that kind of independent candidate could win.

Anonymous said...

:it would be a vicious person, a psychotic version of Bruce Wayne who would essentially make people, who opposed him, disappear. I don't think think I'd want such a megalomaniac for President

'Tis true... so much for representative democracy, oligarchs or political hacks.

Anonymous said...

"a psychotic version of Bruce Wayne"

That was Christian Bale's alter ego on "American Psycho", Patrick Bateman. If Bateman had more oomph, $50 billion (instead of a paltry few millions) in the family coffers, and a bit more desire for the position, he'd be that oligarch.

This fictitious person would have moles in the intelligence agencies, dirt on all his Congressional or Gubernatorial rivals, and a few generals chiming in for support in base expansions, etc. He'd effectively spend his time, as let's say governor of NJ, disempowering his rivals unlike Ross Perot who was pretty much a straight shooter for much of his run. He could run, as an independent and beat the current crop of hacks for the White House. The end result, however, would be martial law and a dictatorship before his terms are over kinda like a Lord Protectorate back during the English Civil War. He may even keep a tradition of changing Presidents, every 4 or 8 years, but that would be mainly ceremonial and that person would be a sock puppet.