Running mate?

[DjLoTi]

Quoted by mayan:
"It would be nice if Gary Johnson, the former Governor of New Mexico, would be Paul's running mate. He's the only other republican I can think of that has any respect for The Constitution. "


Comments?? Discussion???

[kylejack]

Resurrect Barry Goldwater.

[Anne]

Anybody but that jerk John Stossel from 20/20 who pretends to be a libertarian!

[BW4Paul]

Gravel would be a nice choice. He's philosophically similar to Paul, and the fact that he's a Dem would help people feel less "dirty" for voting Republican. :p

[DjLoTi]

It's still really early, I think there's more things to be done before a discussion of a VP.

Still fun to think about :-)

[sparkey]

I think it will depend largely on whether he secures the GOP nod or decides to go independent/third party. If he gets the GOP nod, it'll be important to get somebody with experience, and that doesn't alienate the neocons (going up against both the neocons and the liberals would result in a landslide against him, unfortunately, unless we change a lot of minds in the meantime). Although we clearly don't agree with their politics, it may be politically advantageous to pick someone like Jim Gilmore, John McCain, Mark Sanford, etc. A lot of the names that have come up otherwise seem like better suggestions if he got the Libertarian nomination.

Now say, for the sake of argument, that we can ignore "playing politics" (and I think Ron Paul may do this because he has clearly voiced opposition to supporting men like Rudy Giuliani in any way). Then some names that come to mind include Gary Johnson, Michael Scheuer, Craig Benson, Bob Barr, and Pat Buchanan. Please, let's avoid men without experience like Clint Eastwood, Drew Carey or John Stossel even if Paul runs as something other than a Republican in the general election (although any of them would be better than Andre Marrou, eh?)

[BuddyRey]

Mike Gravel and Gary Johnson are great ideas! I once saw Gary Johnson debating neocon tool Barry McCaffrey on the MSNBC Donahue show, and he's got much of the same common sense and passion for protecting civil liberties that Ron Paul does.

[DjLoTi]

I don't agree with Mike Gravel, because, he is not of the same party. We don't want to be making *too* big of statements. We just want to fix things up. We have to work with the psyche of American People. Should be entertaining though.

[rpliving]

Ron Paul would never get along with Mike Gravel. Mike Gravel is a socialist.

[SeanEdwards]

Tucker Carlson?

Willie Nelson? (I'm pretty sure he shares Paul's views on the IRS :D )

Lou Dobbs?

[rpliving]

Badnarik.

[DjLoTi]

Ron Paul would never get along with Mike Gravel. Mike Gravel is a socialist.

I don't think I could get along with Mike Gravel either... and that's only because of Ron Paul and the answers he has given me. I'd say many other people would agree with that.
Willie Nelson is way unrealistic
I don't even know who Badnarik is...

I don't think anybody knows who would be best for vice president. there's plenty of time to figure out .

[kylejack]

Ron Paul stated Stossel or Walter Williams. Walter Williams would be a phenomenal choice.

[lucky]

Larry Elder would be awesome. Neal Boortz is cool sometimes but talks too much.

Norman Schwarzkopf is supposed to be Libertarian and would be fun for Rep. Paul to campaign with.

[DjLoTi]

Our people are so informed.. it makes me so happy. This website could represent opinion in America.

[SeanEdwards]

Jesse Ventura?

[rpliving]

I don't think I could get along with Mike Gravel either... and that's only because of Ron Paul and the answers he has given me. I'd say many other people would agree with that.
Willie Nelson is way unrealistic
I don't even know who Badnarik is...

I don't think anybody knows who would be best for vice president. there's plenty of time to figure out .


Michael Barnarik Ran for president in 04 as a libertarian. He has similar views to Ron Paul. Look on You Tube. He taught a class on the constitution and it's a very good watch.

[BuddyRey]

Mike Gravel's fairly liberal, but I wouldn't call him a socialist. He even agrees with Ron Paul on the national sales tax.

[rpliving]

Mike Gravel's fairly liberal, but I wouldn't call him a socialist. He even agrees with Ron Paul on the national sales tax.

Ron Paul isnt for a national sales tax....

[kylejack]

Mike Gravel's fairly liberal, but I wouldn't call him a socialist. He even agrees with Ron Paul on the national sales tax.

Universal Healthcare is socialism.

[kylejack]

Ron Paul isnt for a national sales tax....

As a matter of fact, he is. He stated on C-SPAN that he will vote for Fair Tax if it comes to a vote in Congress.

[BuddyRey]

Ron Paul isnt for a national sales tax....

Thank GOD!!! :)

[lucky]

He did state he was for a national sales tax but to abolish the income tax and reduce the government at the same time in an article I read awhile back.

[johngr]

His choice for running mate is the most important of his entire campaign. Above all, he must pick someone unpredictable enough as insurance against getting Kennedyed. But he (or she) must also be stable enough to appeal to and draw from people who would otherwise vote for Hitlery. I say Karen Kwiatkowski.

[Minuteman2008]

Wouldn't it be sort of obvious to pick one of the other Republican candidates with somewhat similar ideology? Someone people are familiar with?

The most likely would be Tancredo or Hunter.

Of course, I think deep down everybody knows he's not getting the nomination, and that's why responses like Mike Gravel seem okay.

Shouldn't the real question be: is he going to run as a third pary choice, and THEN, who would he pick?

Because it's far different if he runs as a third party candidate rather than a Republican. If a Republican, Hunter or Tancredo.
If third party, then maybe some of the names already mentioned would be a possibility.

[SAVEamerica]

I'd like to see Ron Paul and Bill Richardson run together.

[BuddyRey]

Universal Healthcare is socialism.

Just my two cents of course, but it occurs to me that the idea of universal healthcare is too innately egalitarian and endemic to a decent democratic system to be immediately painted with the broad brush of socialism. The people who wouldn't benefit from such a system call it a socialist ideal because they know the word "socialism" scares the livin' daylights out of everybody, but the fact is that the U.S. is the only developed Western nation without SOME form of guaranteed healthcare.

[johngr]

Tancredo or Hunter.

Warmongers.

[johngr]

Just my two cents of course, but it occurs to me that the idea of universal healthcare is too innately egalitarian and endemic to a decent democratic system to be immediately painted with the broad brush of socialism. The people who wouldn't benefit from such a system call it a socialist ideal because they know the word "socialism" scares the livin' daylights out of everybody, but the fact is that the U.S. is the only developed Western nation without SOME form of guaranteed healthcare.

You're backing the wrong horse.

[BuddyRey]

You're backing the wrong horse.

Would you elaborate on that some? I'm just curious as to why everyone seems so averse to this idea.

[lucky]

Just my two cents of course, but it occurs to me that the idea of universal healthcare is too innately egalitarian and endemic to a decent democratic system to be immediately painted with the broad brush of socialism. The people who wouldn't benefit from such a system call it a socialist ideal because they know the word "socialism" scares the livin' daylights out of everybody, but the fact is that the U.S. is the only developed Western nation without SOME form of guaranteed healthcare.


There is a reason we do not. I have been up to Canada and seen Europes healthcare to know I prefer what I have now. It is very expensive and the increase in taxes would be HUGE. Canada can afford it more as they have no need to have a huge Military to support and do not send out a billions of wasteful tax payer dollars to foreign governments.If any troops want to invade Canada then the USA will step in. This means we subsidize Canadas health care. Also we give a huge amount of subsidies to corparations that amounts to billions of corporate welfare.

Europe is alos the same. We subsidize their things because our military means they can divert a part of their revenue to healthcare. We spent a lot of our hard earned taxpayer dollars to insure Europe is safe. We also send many billions to European countries for various things.

To even have a chance of Universal healthcare we need to reign in our Government a lot more. Socialism is very expensive and the bureaucracy is even more so.
I think also that there are other ways to insure that more if not all can get healthcare that does Not include the US government getting involved.

[DjLoTi]

Great point Lucky. You really hit it home on that one

[lucky]

Great point Lucky. You really hit it home on that one

Thanks. I can cite more reasons but wanted to be short and to the point. Night all I have to get up and drive many miles.

[Minuteman2008]

Warmongers.


This is what is bizarre about this site. Someone even mentioned pairing up Bill Richardson with Ron Paul! That is even more crazy than MIke Gravel!

I get the feeling the only reason Paul gets attention here is because he appeals to the anti-war left.

NOBODY talks about his conservative positions on immigration, gun control, and abortion. Just war. But to get the Republican nomination, he had better appeal to more than the anti-war crowd.

If he were running as an independent that would be different, of course.

[asvusa]

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/surveypopup/politics/11214914/de tail.html?p=politics

another poll for ron paul

go for it!!!

please repost all over the place if you can.

[DjLoTi]

Someone even mentioned pairing up Bill Richardson with Ron Paul! That is even more crazy than MIke Gravel!

NOBODY talks about his conservative positions on immigration, gun control, and abortion. Just war. But to get the Republican nomination, he had better appeal to more than the anti-war crowd.

It's more then just anti-war. It's anti-freedom.

We have 18 months to educate the American people.

It's going to be fun.

[BuddyRey]

This is what is bizarre about this site. Someone even mentioned pairing up Bill Richardson with Ron Paul! That is even more crazy than MIke Gravel!

I get the feeling the only reason Paul gets attention here is because he appeals to the anti-war left.

NOBODY talks about his conservative positions on immigration, gun control, and abortion. Just war. But to get the Republican nomination, he had better appeal to more than the anti-war crowd.

If he were running as an independent that would be different, of course.

Oddly enough, as a member of the anti-war Left, part of the reason I've grown so disillusioned with the Democratic party is due to their nanny-state position on guns, as well as their utterly disgraceful lack of action to curb illegal immigration. Ron Paul is, quite literally, the best of both worlds wrapped up into the same package.

[Minuteman2008]

Oddly enough, as a member of the anti-war Left, part of the reason I've grown so disillusioned with the Democratic party is due to their nanny-state position on guns, as well as their utterly disgraceful lack of action to curb illegal immigration. Ron Paul is, quite literally, the best of both worlds wrapped up into the same package.

Messages like this give me hope for his chances. While I might have traditionally voted Republican and you Democrat, we can both agree that on the big issues Ron Paul is right.

[PennCustom4RP]

Walter Williams would be a phenomenal choice.


Ok, since no one else wants to mention it, I'll be the bad guy.
The same people who won't vote for Obama, because hes a black man, won't vote for RP if Walter Williams is on the ticket.
Same goes for those who won't vote for Hillary because shes a woman, Karen Kwiatkowski would be that issue.
Either issue could hurt RP, regardless on how much anyone may think things have changed in America, racism and chauvinism still exists and there is no point in alienating potential voters.
Also I think any other candidate that did not get the nomination would be a bad choice, as the people did not want them for the nominee for President the 1st time around, so slipping them in the back door would put some off. It cant be someone whose own political agenda/aspirations upset the 'apple cart'. Basically the running mate has to be a RP clone, as closely as possible.
It will be someone relatively unknown, neutral, an agency head, like Sheurer or the like.
just my 02
Mik

[kylejack]

Ok, since no one else wants to mention it, I'll be the bad guy.
The same people who won't vote for Obama, because hes a black man, won't vote for RP if Walter Williams is on the ticket.
Same goes for those who won't vote for Hillary because shes a woman, Karen Kwiatkowski would be that issue.
Either issue could hurt RP, regardless on how much anyone may think things have changed in America, there is no point in alienating potential voters.

just my 02
Mik
Having a brilliant economist like Walter Williams on the bottom of the ticket will draw more people than it will alienate. We're seeking the votes and interest of people who want freedom for all mankind.

Besides, this entire discussion is academic. I'll be hated for saying this but I believe it to be true: Ron Paul is not likely to get the Republican nomination. My most realistic hopes for this campaign are for it to spread the message of liberty and limited government.

[DjLoTi]

Ron Paul is not likely to get the Republican nomination. My most realistic hopes for this campaign are for it to spread the message of liberty and limited government.

The good thing about this is that we have 18 months, or over 500 days to promote his campaign. With the massive amounts of efforts from everybody, we'll take this government back in a landslide.

[kylejack]

The good thing about this is that we have 18 months, or over 500 days to promote his campaign. With the massive amounts of efforts from everybody, we'll take this government back in a landslide.

I've placed my highest hopes on it.

[Sakimoto]

Larry Elder would be awesome. Neal Boortz is cool sometimes but talks too much.

Norman Schwarzkopf is supposed to be Libertarian and would be fun for Rep. Paul to campaign with.

Neal Boortz is NOT cool. He's another talking head claiming to be libertarian WHO IS FOR THE "WAR" on TERROR.

[Bradley in DC]

Wow, interesting discussion. How come the MSM don't have as good conversations as we do on this forum?!

Obviously, we need to avoid the joke mentions (newscasters, hasbeen Democrats, entertainers, no name LPers, et al.). This person should adhere to Dr. Paul's idea of the role of government (health care is not an issue between the states deserving a Federal solution). We also need to "balance" the ticket with someone with more managerial/executive experience.

I suggest Mark Sanford, the current governor of SC (perhaps offer it after winning in Iowa and NH just before South Carolina's primary to secure the nomination?). Although he endorsed McCain last time, he has stayed neutral so far. Sanford and Paul were close when Sanford was in the House with him.

Walter Williams, Bob Barr, and Colin Powell (Alma wouldn't let him take it, but the goodwill from the gesture would be huge), and of course Gary Johnson would be fine choices.

[johngr]

Would you elaborate on that some? I'm just curious as to why everyone seems so averse to this idea.

Ron Paul believes in leaving problem solutions to the market. He would to the extent legally, practically, politically and compassion-wise possible do everything he can to get the government out of the health care business.

As far as my own views on health care go, around the turn of the last century health care was "free" in that people could buy and practicioners could offer what remedies they saw fit at market prices and the government stayed out of their business. I prefer to make my health care decisions with advice only if I choose it. I don't want the government interfereing or skewing the market or telling me what drugs, remedies, nutrients or herbs I can or cannot buy. I believe the government's interventions have done FAR more harm than good.

As an aside, speaking of that we need to get the word out that Ron Paul is the only candidate who will protect our rights to vitamins and herbs.

read this:http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?Id=1749 Dr. Paul agrees with the "prescriptions" therein and will not change his views. I suggest you move to the Hillary board.

[Silverback]

On universal healthcare, what many people miss is that in addition to the problem of forcing people to pay for the healthcare of strangers under penalty of imprisonment created by using tax money to fund the system, there's an even bigger issue.

If government is paying for your healthcare, your health, activities, and nearly everything you do become the governments business. You end up with mommy staters telling you you can't smoke, can't drink, can't eat the foods you like, can't participate in hazardous activities, etc. and locking you up for growing the wrong plants, keeping the wrong gun in the house, driving without a five-point harness and 15 airbags, and so on, and argueing it's legitimate because of the costs to the system.

Socialized medicine is totally hostile to individual liberty.

[mesler]

Colin Powell

I know he now has some baggage, but I think he'd help the campaign immensely. He still has national hero status, imo.

[beermotor]

His choice for running mate is the most important of his entire campaign. Above all, he must pick someone unpredictable enough as insurance against getting Kennedyed. But he (or she) must also be stable enough to appeal to and draw from people who would otherwise vote for Hitlery. I say Karen Kwiatkowski.

That wouldn't be a horrible choice, either.

INTERESTING suggestion!

[swatmc]

Running mates for Ron Paul:

Randy Couture
or
Chuck Norris

End of discussion!

[Craig_R]

Michael Badnarik would be my first choice. I know alot of you have no idea who that is but if you looked into him you'd find his politics are near Idendical to President Pauls. he too ran for president as a Libertarian

[Tin_Foil_Hat]

Running mates for Ron Paul:

Randy Couture
or
Chuck Norris

End of discussion!

And Ted Nugent as Secretary of State. :D

[swatmc]

If Chuck Norris was Vice President and Ted Nugent was secretary of state... that would be the most perfect combination of brains (Ron Paul), red neck firepower (Ted Nugent) and roundhouse kicks to the face (Chuck Norris).

Bin Laden would turn himself in out of pure fear.

Seriously.

[rpliving]

As a matter of fact, he is. He stated on C-SPAN that he will vote for Fair Tax if it comes to a vote in Congress.

He said he would vote for it because anything is better than the IRS, however he prefers nothing.

[winston_blade]

Whoever it is, it should be someone that would run for president after Ron's 2 terms were up.

[Pedrique]

If Chuck Norris was Vice President and Ted Nugent was secretary of state... that would be the most perfect combination of brains (Ron Paul), red neck firepower (Ted Nugent) and roundhouse kicks to the face (Chuck Norris).

Bin Laden would turn himself in out of pure fear.

Seriously.

That is the funniest thing I've read in a while. So great. Nugent lives just a few miles from me...I'll ask him!

[swatmc]

Uncle Ted would be down.

Especially considering the fact that Ron Paul is the most gung ho 2nd amendment candidate on the ticket.

Did you know that all further debates and elections would be immediately canceled if Chuck Norris endorsed Ron Paul for President? It's no secret that since birth, Chuck Norris has always decided who becomes president...

Swear to God.

[thuja]

what???

[thuja]

what happened to bob bowman, fla.?

[Brandybuck]

It sounds like Ron Paul is considering Walter Williams or John Stossel. I think Walter would be awesome! But it's still more than a year away.

http://www.freecentury.com/2007/05/27/ron-paul-best-running-mate-williams-or-stossel/

[White Knight]

If she hadn't died in a car accident in October, I'd say former Idaho Congressman Helen Chenoweth. Or former Sen. Jesse Helms if he were younger. Bobb Barr or Pat Buchanan would be the best choices. Alan Keyes is good too.

[White Knight]

Walter Williams, Bob Barr, and Colin Powell (Alma wouldn't let him take it, but the goodwill from the gesture would be huge), and of course Gary Johnson would be fine choices.

How can you like BOTH Barr and Powel? Barr is a constitutional paleo-conservative, while Powel is social-liberal pro-affirmative action scum. He supports abortion and gun-control...That's bad.

[AgentSmith]

Lou Dobbs

[AgentSmith]

I'd like to see Ron Paul and Bill Richardson run together.

Thats one of the craziest comments ever. :confused: These guys are night and day, a constitutionalist and a globalist? Yeah right!

[BuddyRey]

Thats one of the craziest comments ever. :confused: These guys are night and day, a constitutionalist and a globalist? Yeah right!

I'm not trying to pick on Bill Richardson, but he got seriously thrashed on Meet the Press last week! I like Richardson OK, but after seeing him tripped up in his own net of lies, flipflops, and back-peddling, I'm not so sure anymore. Anyone see it? If not, check it out on the MTP website, or with their podcast on iTunes, and enjoy the pure, unadulterated smackdown.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

[Captain Shays]

Walter Williams and Ron Paul would be the winning ticket for sure.

What truelly educated person doesn't respect Walter Williams?

Not only that but think of the minority votes it would bring in. Think of the change in thinking it would bring to all the nanny state minorites who would learn so much about freedom, the Constitution, the economy, and truth in general if Walter Williams were the VP.

Not only that, but I would trust him if anything ever happened to Ron Paul to run this country and I would love to see him take up the the torch after 8 years of Ron Paul.

Another one would be Bob Barr. Another great choice would be Pat Buchanon.

I love Michael Badnarik but I want to save hm for the Supreme Court.

[kylejack]

I'm not trying to pick on Bill Richardson, but he got seriously thrashed on Meet the Press last week! I like Richardson OK, but after seeing him tripped up in his own net of lies, flipflops, and back-peddling, I'm not so sure anymore. Anyone see it? If not, check it out on the MTP website, or with their podcast on iTunes, and enjoy the pure, unadulterated smackdown.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

Wow! He did HORRIBLE!

[4Horsemen]

Jesse Ventura?

Sean, your the man with the plan! Jesse Ventura would be perfect, former Navy SEAL, Vietnam vet, 4 years as a mayor and 4 as governor of Minn. Plus; he was a professional wrestler with big-time name recognition. The MSM couldn't touch him especially "Faux News". The military would love him, and all those wrestling fans, Nascar, NFL fans would back him. He's against the war, and wants our freedoms back to Constitutional standard. Jesse Ventura is the answer there's no doubt about it, folks!!!!!!!!!

Check out this video from a few years ago! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm2weLS5gJ4&mode=related&search=

[pguitarb]

What about Aaron Russo???

[4Horsemen]

Russo is very sick from cancer.

[Bradley in DC]

Ok, since no one else wants to mention it, I'll be the bad guy.
The same people who won't vote for Obama, because hes a black man, won't vote for RP if Walter Williams is on the ticket.
Same goes for those who won't vote for Hillary because shes a woman, Karen Kwiatkowski would be that issue.
Either issue could hurt RP, regardless on how much anyone may think things have changed in America, racism and chauvinism still exists and there is no point in alienating potential voters.
Also I think any other candidate that did not get the nomination would be a bad choice, as the people did not want them for the nominee for President the 1st time around, so slipping them in the back door would put some off. It cant be someone whose own political agenda/aspirations upset the 'apple cart'. Basically the running mate has to be a RP clone, as closely as possible.
It will be someone relatively unknown, neutral, an agency head, like Sheurer or the like.
just my 02
Mik

Ok, then, I'll be the good guy: Janice Rogers Brown. Double billing to fit your post, incredible life story, elected statewide as the state Supreme Court judge in California and outspoken advocate in the law for individual rights and limited government.

[disciple]

Wesley Clark.

[Seer]

But what are Wlater's positions on the war?

Anyway Wlater is perfect because he can draw minority voters (especially if Barrack or Richardson aren't on the Dem side) and he can also head off the Ron Paul Survival Report Crap by sticking by his running mate.

Unfortunately, he has written so much that it's likely something he wrote is nuclear. In fact, I recall reasing an article by him in support of racial profiling. That's a no-no in politics (whether it works or not).

[SeanEdwards]

Ok, since no one else wants to mention it, I'll be the bad guy.
The same people who won't vote for Obama, because hes a black man, won't vote for RP if Walter Williams is on the ticket.


For every ultraracist that would be repulsed by a black VP choice, there would probably be a voter inspired by the possibility of a voting for someone who wasn't an old white guy.

And personally, I don't particularily care about pandering to the wishes of racists. Paul opponents already make hay out of David Duke supporting Paul.

Which is not to say that I'm endorsing Williams, or any particular non old white guy as VP. I'm just saying I don't think Paul should rule out those possibilities because of a fear of alienating some white trash assholes.

[SeanEdwards]

In fact, I recall reasing an article by him in support of racial profiling. That's a no-no in politics (whether it works or not).

Yeah, we can't let reality enter into these discussions of policy, can we? Someone might be offended.

[Patrick Henry]

I really like William Norman Grigg.
http://www.freedominourtime.blogspot.com/

I also really like G. Edward Griffin as stated earlier and Dr. Edwin Vieira.

[james1906]

tom mcclintock would be a good choice. he's a republican state senator who ran for governor in the recall election and refused to back out for arnold.

here's what a liberal newspaper wrote about him. one of their writers endorsed him for governor to balance out the spend crazy democrat legislature.

http://www.ocweekly.com/features/features/the-case-for-governor-tom-mcclintock/20603/?page=2

[Revolution9]

There is a reason we do not. I have been up to Canada and seen Europes healthcare to know I prefer what I have now. It is very expensive and the increase in taxes would be HUGE. Canada can afford it more as they have no need to have a huge Military to support and do not send out a billions of wasteful tax payer dollars to foreign governments.

You are wrong. Canadan hospitals are on the average more advanced. The military hospitals especially NDMC Ottawa are spotless and equipped with the latest. I was a physiotherapist tech there and even US politicians and Generals would come there for treatment. When I did live in Canada everyone with a fulltime job paid 21 dollars a month into their provincial health insurance plan. The provinces had agrrements that if an Ontario citizen got sick in Alberta for instance that his Ontario Hospital Insurance Plan would pay. I also think a buck or two of that 21 dollars went in a kitty to take care of payments by those in financial trouble. If they gave you welfare while you were ill or whaever then once you were able you HAD to go down to Canada Manpower and apply for jobs on their comprehensive nationwide jobs board. If in a remote area the cost of moving was often paid. There is not a welfare state in Canada.. My experience with US hospitals is that the Emergency Rooms are loaded to the rafters with welfare state clients who are ill from bad food, drugs, obesity and lack of exercise. The waiting areas are filthy and often stink and look like a vector for disease.

Again..these are local to the province and the feds are only cordinating between the provinces.. probably the best way to handle it here..at the local state level. As well..it should not be mandatory..but an option. I do not visit doctors and have not since my last physical in 1986. I can diagnose and treat myself naturally. The few conditions i would need a doctor for are broken bones or trauma of some kind from a severe accident. So..I don't like the idea of paying for the old redneck down the block who drank cheap shit liquor, swallowed velveeta macaroni daily, went to sleep the last three decades using chlordiazepams and smokes the cheap brand of cigarettes, to take an ambulance to the hospital twice a week because he forgot how to breathe.. True story BTW about the old man, habits and ambulance. Probably saw over 120 ambulance visits.. I guess Medicare paid for it at minimum 700 bucks a pop plus hosspital expenses on top of that..

Best Regards
Randy

[Bradley in DC]

You are wrong. Canadan hospitals are on the average more advanced. The military hospitals especially NDMC Ottawa are spotless and equipped with the latest.
Best Regards
Randy

WAY off topic here. Why not start a new thread?

[Hawaii Libertarian]

Besides, this entire discussion is academic. I'll be hated for saying this but I believe it to be true: Ron Paul is not likely to get the Republican nomination. My most realistic hopes for this campaign are for it to spread the message of liberty and limited government.

For sake of discussion, let's say that somehow Ron Paul pulls it off, wins the nomination, and gets elected. Unless there are substantial changes in the makeup of Congress, he will face the worst legislative gridlock in history, which makes the current standoff between Bush and the Reid/Pelosi led Congress seem like a group hug.

Besides increasing awareness, we need more Ron Pauls in Congress to help push a constitutional legislative agenda, regardless of who the President is. In some ways, if we could get more Ron Paul-like representatives into the House (where all spending bills must originate), we'd also be much better off.

If you want to see a model of this at the state level, go look at state government in Hawaii today. We reelected Republican governor Linda Lingle in a landslide, but there was no corresponding coat tails to elect like minded legislators. She's no Ron Paul for sure as Hawaii is one of the most liberal and socialist states in the nation, but even her meager fiscally conservative agenda is dead on arrival due to her vetoes being overridden and the Democrats not confirming some of her appointees.

Realistically, without a matching revolution in Congress, a President Paul could veto unconstitutional legislation week after week, but without changes in Congress, he'd be facing lots of veto overrides and a Supreme Court that interprets those laws that is split between conservative justices and those liberal justices that want to legislate from the bench.

At the very minimum, hopefully Dr. Paul's candidacy will encourage like minded people to become active in politics at the local and state levels as well so that the "Ron Paul Revolution" will stick. Best case, we need a large enough block of representatives and senators to help keep Dr. Paul's vetoes from being overridden. Ideally, the block would be large enough to keep unconstitutional legislation from being passed in the first place.

The big benefit from the Meet Ups that I see is besides supporting efforts to elect Dr. Paul, we can encourage and cultivate people who love the Constitution who have been marginalized or sitting on the bench to get back into politics for love of country and Constitution, not money.

[LibertyEagle]

1. Walter Williams
2. Barry Goldwater, Jr. (although I haven't checked much into his voting record while in Congress).

[mesler]

Tucker Carlson?

Willie Nelson? (I'm pretty sure he shares Paul's views on the IRS :D )

Lou Dobbs?

Thanks to Steven Colbert, I always think of Lou Dobbs in the stealth bomber now. :D

[winston84]

Pat Buchanan w00t! Tancredo would be good too...

I definitely don't see Powell as his running mate. Remember that Powell was the figure that made the case to goto Iraq pointing out their "weapon silos" to the UN and the American audience. I know that the reason Powell left was because of his disgust with the administration, but he should of left way before that...

[buffalokid777]

While Lou Dobbs, always says he doesn't want political office.....

I would love to see him as a running mate for Ron Paul......at least if we can make it to that point....

With Ron being pretty Libertarian in his views....and Lou pretty much a populist in his views......

I would love to see a Ron Paul / Lou Dobbs ticket.....their views aren't THAT far apart in alot of areas....it would be a nice balance of ideas....

Lou's popularity on CNN has been increasing just as Ron Pauls popularity has.....

I know it's a fantasy....but I think it would be awsome......

[buffalokid777]

Also let's not forget Lou offered all presidential candidates an invitation to come on his show....

Ron Paul was the FIRST to accept.....

And after Ron was on Lou liked what Ron was saying.....

[buffalokid777]

For sake of discussion, let's say that somehow Ron Paul pulls it off, wins the nomination, and gets elected. Unless there are substantial changes in the makeup of Congress, he will face the worst legislative gridlock in history, which makes the current standoff between Bush and the Reid/Pelosi led Congress seem like a group hug.


Personally,

I think if Ron Paul was elected president....

He would make the perfect REFEREE for the right and their neocon leaders....

And the left and their Neolib leaders.....

Let the Left and the Right fight it out with Ron Paul as REFEREE with the veto power....

Finally some balance to our government if that's the way it turns out.....I think that would be better than what we have.....

[angrydragon]

From the man himself.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/05/do_tell_ron_paul_on_babies_pro.html

Ron Paul: But a running mate. Somebody like Walter Williams. Walter Williams is a very good economist. John Stossel, John Stossel would be good.

[Shmuel Spade]

For sake of discussion, let's say that somehow Ron Paul pulls it off, wins the nomination, and gets elected.…

Do you know just how much power the President has? You should read some Harry Browne to see just what a libertarian President could do without the permission of the Congress, or the SCOTUS. Besides, the worst justices on the court (Stevens and Ginsburg) will likely be retiring within the next 4 to 8 years, and only POTUS Paul can be trusted to appoint the best justices.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=13247

[angrydragon]

Isn't Gravel in debt?

Gravel, Mike AK

Raised:$15,534 Spent: $18,304 Cash on hand: $498 Debt: $88,516

He has a fund raising thing on his website for 70k (for May).

[theodorelogan]

Ron Paul has repeatedly said that he would eliminate the IRS and replace it with NOTHING if he was elected.

He does not support a national sales tax.

[Hawaii Libertarian]

Do you know just how much power the President has? You should read some Harry Browne to see just what a libertarian President could do without the permission of the Congress, or the SCOTUS. Besides, the worst justices on the court (Stevens and Ginsburg) will likely be retiring within the next 4 to 8 years, and only POTUS Paul can be trusted to appoint the best justices.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=13247

Yes, the President does have a lot of power, and I believe that Dr. Paul is a man of principle. He could get a lot done just by issuing executive orders, too, but I don't think that's his style as a devotee of the Constitution. I don't think he would want to be portrayed as a hypocrite, though the MSM would be all over him like wasps anyway.

Don't get me wrong, anything is better than what we have now, but it would be far greater if we could get change that couldn't easily be undone by a subsequent administration.

[Shmuel Spade]

Yes, the President does have a lot of power, and I believe that Dr. Paul is a man of principle. He could get a lot done just by issuing executive orders, too, but I don't think that's his style as a devotee of the Constitution. I don't think he would want to be portrayed as a hypocrite, though the MSM would be all over him like wasps anyway.

Don't get me wrong, anything is better than what we have now, but it would be far greater if we could get change that couldn't easily be undone by a subsequent administration.

Issuing executive orders is unnecessary to greatly change the federal government unilaterally. All Paul needs to do is rescind thousands of executive orders already issued.

President Paul has the power to pardon for federal crimes, so this would mean essentially that the federal drug war is over, and the federal war against gun owners is over.

Do you know how many cabinet departments are directly underneath the President, and survive only by his good graces? He could eliminate them and the staff that work for those departments singlehandedly.

Read your Constitution and apply some imagination.

Being the POTUS he will have the power of veto and will likely veto any and everything that comes to his desk. In order to beat that veto, the (R)s and the (D)s will be forced to work together. By the sheer logic of his philosophy Ron Paul is a uniter and not a divider. If the Congress remains as divided as it is and no legislation passes, all the better.

With the retirement of a few justices Paul could have his solicitor general before the SCOTUS night and day bringing challenges to the Constitutionality of some Congressional activities.

There's just so much that could be done that it boggles the mind to even think about how it might go.

Please read the article that I linked in my last post, and read Article II of the Constitution.

[beedj for Ron Paul]

Just my two cents of course, but it occurs to me that the idea of universal healthcare is too innately egalitarian and endemic to a decent democratic system to be immediately painted with the broad brush of socialism. The people who wouldn't benefit from such a system call it a socialist ideal because they know the word "socialism" scares the livin' daylights out of everybody, but the fact is that the U.S. is the only developed Western nation without SOME form of guaranteed healthcare.


Socialism it is. It would destroy our country.

[CurtisLow]

Alan Keyes would be a good vice.
http://www.renewamerica.us/keyes/whois.htm

[nayjevin]

wilton d. alston
http://www.lewrockwell.com/alston/alston-arch.html

karen kwiatkowski

john stossel

choosing anyone with previous political experience would turn me off.

[Shmuel Spade]

Alan Keyes would be a good vice.
http://www.renewamerica.us/keyes/whois.htm

Too theocratic.

[Revolution9]

Joseph Charles Wilson would be loyal, a good strongarm VP and they dare not take President Paul out or Joe will get them.. I thought about this for a good ten minutes and tossed out hundreds of names to get his name and can't think of a downside yet. He is a trained and qualified Ambassador/Statesman who sticks to his guns even if the personal cost looks like it may be a great burden. His wife is stunning and incredibly smart as well as both of them knowing the nculear proliferation networks from the inside. He was Ambassador appointed by Republicans to Iraq from 88-91 and knows Africa..the new hotspot. He would be acceptable to crossover Democrats and Independents due to his lawful outing of the Bush Admins lies about yellowcake.

The bottom line appears to be that the VP must be a politcal known and not some schmuck actor or athlete like I have seen mentioned. No cult of personality guy is needed. Someone who understands the international issues and already has a list of phone numbers to call. Someone who they know would put serious boots to the fire if an assassination happened and they became President. Those who have too much politcal ambition should be counted out as they may pull an LBJ. They must be a natural Statesman as Dr Paul is as America has alot of humble apologies to bestow around the world. Someone who can continue to hold the reigns of power in 2016.

Best Regards
Randy

[LizF]

Joseph Charles Wilson would be loyal, a good strongarm VP and they dare not take President Paul out or Joe will get them.. I thought about this for a good ten minutes and tossed out hundreds of names to get his name and can't think of a downside yet. He is a trained and qualified Ambassador/Statesman who sticks to his guns even if the personal cost looks like it may be a great burden. His wife is stunning and incredibly smart as well as both of them knowing the nculear proliferation networks from the inside. He was Ambassador appointed by Republicans to Iraq from 88-91 and knows Africa..the new hotspot. He would be acceptable to crossover Democrats and Independents due to his lawful outing of the Bush Admins lies about yellowcake.

The bottom line appears to be that the VP must be a politcal known and not some schmuck actor or athlete like I have seen mentioned. No cult of personality guy is needed. Someone who understands the international issues and already has a list of phone numbers to call. Someone who they know would put serious boots to the fire if an assassination happened and they became President. Those who have too much politcal ambition should be counted out as they may pull an LBJ. They must be a natural Statesman as Dr Paul is as America has alot of humble apologies to bestow around the world. Someone who can continue to hold the reigns of power in 2016.

Best Regards
Randy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with a lot of what you've said here Randy. I hadn't thought of Joe Wilson, and he should definitely be considered--if not for VP, than for something else in the administration for sure (e.g. Sec of State).

I also agree with the suggestion someone made earlier in this thread about choosing SC Gov Marc Sanford for VP. He has legislative & executive experience; has some (positive, I believe) name recognition; is in favor of limited govt (like RP); is relatively young (but not overly so at 47) which would balance RP in age; he has an MBA; while in the Congress, he was in favor of Social Security privatization; etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sanford




I realize it may seem premature and/or cheeky for us to try to envision what RP's cabinet could look like, but it's important for RP to have realistic choices to propose when he's asked about it on the campaign trail.

[Bloody Holly]

Kucinich. If anyone even thought about sniping Ron Paul, they'd have second thoughts ;)

[PineGroveDave]

tom mcclintock would be a good choice. he's a republican state senator who ran for governor in the recall election and refused to back out for arnold.

here's what a liberal newspaper wrote about him. one of their writers endorsed him for governor to balance out the spend crazy democrat legislature.

http://www.ocweekly.com/features/features/the-case-for-governor-tom-mcclintock/20603/?page=2

Word up my friend. Here's another for for McClintock. That would be an awesome team... :)

[Revolution9]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with a lot of what you've said here Randy. I hadn't thought of Joe Wilson, and he should definitely be considered--if not for VP, than for something else in the administration for sure (e.g. Sec of State).

I also agree with the suggestion someone made earlier in this thread about choosing SC Gov Marc Sanford for VP. He has legislative & executive experience; has some (positive, I believe) name recognition; is in favor of limited govt (like RP); is relatively young (but not overly so at 47) which would balance RP in age; he has an MBA; while in the Congress, he was in favor of Social Security privatization; etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sanford

I realize it may seem premature and/or cheeky for us to try to envision what RP's cabinet could look like, but it's important for RP to have realistic choices to propose when he's asked about it on the campaign trail.

I think alot of touting of executive experience is not necessarily a good thing. The modern American executive is the epitomy of ego centered prideful arrogance. Welll..except for the rap guys..heh.. People think executives know about economics but they don't they know business and sales and money accumulating. A government leader should have a good grasp of economics and not have a knack for grasping for money. The federal government should not be run like a business. It should adhere to budgetary constraints but the similarity stops there. Business are ofttimes entirely wihtout ethic as the focus is on the bottomline and the executives position is in peril if the bottomline is not expanding regardless of practices implemented by said executive to get the growth to save his ass and keep his outrageously bloated pay and benefits package intact.

The government on the other hand should only be a handler of our money, putting it to use were we tell them and withdrawing it from where we want it withdrawn. They are to be our representative when dealing with other nations. We do not want salesman representing us..nor slick executives talking out of both sides of their mouths cutting deals on the side for their future approbriums. Cheney is the prime example of Executives in Government. In his sphere he gets a high five for his machinations. I know. I dealt with one of his arms dealers trying to buy 2.5 million metric tons of heavy melting steel for him while seated as VP..Totally fucking illegal. They..the Tennessee arms dealer and his attorney were both major jerks and thought that Iraq blood being spilled was funny. I wanted to reach through the phone and pummel him. They were fucking proud of this!! excuse my tone..but this outrages me now four years later..

Career Statesmen make better Cabinet members and VP's in my opinion. One of the reasons Dr Paul can keep the stance he does ish e is sure of his economic future as a memeber of the medical community. Someone who is not worried about their economic gain from holding office is the best type of Civil Srvant IMHO.

Best Regards
randy

[aravoth]

I'm hearing rumors that it might be this guy
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/

For those of you not famliar with him, all I can say is holy shit! Could anyone come up with something better than this?

[kimosabi]

Well I think Rachel Mills should be Vice President

Rachel would definitely bring some glamour back to the White House

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oDx0Q50EJw

[literatim]

You need someone that can cement Ron Paul into the Presidency. I say Pat Buchanan as he won't be controlled by the Elite and has a good sized following by himself.

[LibertyEagle]

I really like Pat, but the ADL would have a field day; especially with all the lies going around claiming Dr. Paul is racist.

Having Dr. Williams as his running mate, would make it rather hard for the slanderers to make hay with their lies, now wouldn't it. Plus Williams is a good man.

[LizF]

I'm hearing rumors that it might be this guy
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/

For those of you not famliar with him, all I can say is holy shit! Could anyone come up with something better than this?


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He certainly has an impressive resume!

While he might very well be a great VP, I'm wondering if he wouldn't be better suited as Treasury Secretary, considering the changes (deemed controversial by many) RP wants to bring about (e.g. eliminating the IRS & Fed Reserve, bringing back the gold standard). WW's credentials in Economics might help assuage some of those concerns.

Moreover, his age (71?) might be a strike against him for VP, as a heavily "senior" ticket could be a concern to voters.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_the_Treasury


Responsibilities
Treasury Department official, surrounded by packages of newly minted currency, counting and wrapping dollar bills. Washington, D.C., 1907.
Treasury Department official, surrounded by packages of newly minted currency, counting and wrapping dollar bills. Washington, D.C., 1907.

The basic functions of the Department of the Treasury include:

* Managing Federal finances;
* Collecting taxes, duties and monies paid to and due to the U.S. and paying all bills of the U.S.;
* Producing all postage stamps, currency and coinage;
* Managing Government accounts and the U.S. public debt;
* Supervising national banks and thrift institutions;
* Advising on domestic and international financial, monetary, economic, trade and tax policy - fiscal policy being the sum of these, and the ultimate responsibility of Congress.
* Enforcing Federal finance and tax laws;
* Investigating and prosecuting tax evaders, counterfeiters, forgers, smugglers, illicit spirits distillers, and gun law violators.

With respect to the estimation of revenues for the executive branch, Treasury serves a purpose parallel to that of the Office of Management and Budget for the estimation of spending for the executive branch, the Joint Committee on Taxation for the estimation of revenues for Congress, and the Congressional Budget Office for the estimation of spending for Congress.

The term Treasury reform usually refers narrowly to reform of monetary policy and related economic policy and accounting reform. The broader term monetary reform usually refers to reform of policy of institutions such as the International Monetary Fund.

[angrydragon]

http://digg.com/political_opinion/Walter_Williams_endorses_Ron_Paul_for_President

Walter William's favorite candidate, Ron Paul.

[CurtisLow]

I agree Walter Williams would make a great VP

[aravoth]

He would be an outstanding VP I think. Even though he's old, it would be awsome. Like a couple of wise sages or oracles guiding us back to glory.

[Quantumystic]

Remember that we're talking about a VICE-president. RP still has all the real juice.

Someone who could really "seal the deal" on bipartisanship, and look strong on defense/security... Chuck Hagel.

He's reached across the aisle when others wouldn't. He's a distinguished serviceman. He reminded Bush that Impeachment is a vehicle for stopping an out of control "C-I-C".

Hagel brings alot to the table.

[beermotor]

That's not a half bad idea. Tancredo is too annoying, I think, to be of much use politically. Sure, immigration is bad, but is it slaughtering americans daily? I doubt it.

[Quantumystic]

Tancredo's also already looking to scale back his campaign. Supposedly, over the Immigration issue.

Hagel, otoh, is still "waiting in the wings". And in interviews, he comes across as a "walk softly, and carry a big stick" kinda guy. Which I like. As opposed to Bush and Cheney's wanna-be-bully style.

I've run this combo passed more than a few that seemed to really like the idea.

[Quantumystic]

Chuck Hagel?

Thoughts?

[james1906]

Word up my friend. Here's another for for McClintock. That would be an awesome team... :)

glad someone knows about him. i don't know where he stands on the war though. he's only run for state offices, so it hasn't been an issue.

[Swmorgan77]

Corsi maybe? He has been approached by the Constitution party, but they would probably part ways on the non-interventionism thing...

Still, it might be a strong ticket for anti-NAU/Police State and Pro-Constitution.

[torchbearer]

Judge Napolitano!

[american.swan]

If he were running as an independent that would be different, of course.

I think the dynamics of a third party bid won't change much of anything. Except that in a third party, he has to market himself more to the dems. Less republicans will vote for him unless he is listed as a republican, so he'll need all the indy and dem votes he can get.

Lets be honest. The republicans, sorry, Neocons and the powers-that-be are going to do whatever they can to stop anyone from voting for Ron Paul; starting with airtime as we have seen. Ron Paul's message is clear and hasn't changed in 30 some odd years. We have to get the message out to the uninformed; because the message is, in this case, very powerful.

As the message gets out, as it is now, other Republicans in the race are going to start copying that message. Nothing will change from a mass media perspective when/if he runs as an independent.

Internet and literal footwork are Ron's only hope to get numbers high enough to win.

I hope, that Dr Paul will somehow pull this off, but there is so so much against him. Including the voting machines. Deep in our souls, intellectually, we know Paul is the only person who should be president. And it would benefit Dem's, IND, Rep, and Libs if he was elected. (note: someone make a video showing why each individual party should vote for Dr Paul)

Paul needs to be marketed as a vote for America's future. For our children and for us NOW!

[Hawaii Libertarian]

Chuck Hagel?

Thoughts?
Chuck Hagel is a favorite of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and has spoken with the CFR's president in Washington, DC. There is no way he would align himself with Dr. Paul and I don't think Dr. Paul would want to align himself with an internationalist.

Hagel may be expressing some populist views, but it may be just a CFR tactic to put someone on the stage with a "softer" interventionist record than the hardcore neo-cons, but make no mistake, Hagel is all for the CFR's internationalist agenda.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9220/

[Quantumystic]

Chuck Hagel is a favorite of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and has spoken with the CFR's president in Washington, DC. There is no way he would align himself with Dr. Paul and I don't think Dr. Paul would want to align himself with an internationalist.

Hagel may be expressing some populist views, but it may be just a CFR tactic to put someone on the stage with a "softer" interventionist record than the hardcore neo-cons, but make no mistake, Hagel is all for the CFR's internationalist agenda.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9220/

I just read that, and point to several things.

First, November 2005. That was then, this is NOW.

Second, a few quotes:

To question your government is not unpatriotic—to not question your government is unpatriotic. America owes its men and women in uniform a policy worthy of their sacrifices.

As we consider the regional context of stability and security in Iraq, there is another issue that we must deal with—a relationship between the United States and Iran. The fact that our two governments cannot—or will not—sit down to exchange views must end.

Terrorism is a real threat and a present danger that we must confront and defeat. But we must not sacrifice the strengths and ideals of America that the world has come to respect and trust, and that define us.

The American people should demand that the President request a Declaration of War and the Congress formally declare war, if and when the President believes that committing American troops is in the vital national security interests of this country. This would make the President and Congress, together, accountable for their actions—just as the Founders of our country intended.

Third, sometimes, people join an institution to change from within. Like ME joining the GOP to support Dr. Paul in the primaries. It is NOT because I support the directions and policies that the NeoCons have driven in the party for the last 7 years.

People like Alex Jones go a bit overboard sometimes. Angelina Jolie I read is joining the CFR. But I seriously doubt SHE is some insidious threat to America.

I think Hagel has some serious strong points he can bring to the table, and he sends a message of bipartisanship.

Dr. Paul is a very wise man who can make up his own mind.

[ThePieSwindler]

Most of the people on the CFR are not members of the global elite, and think they are genuinely helping America and the world with their policies/membership. Not everyone who is a member is an elitist globalist NWO supporter (in fact, most probably aren't) - membership does not necessarily define a motive.

[sunny]

ok folks,
got some interesting choices for vp..........isn't that a little of the cart before the horse?
i mean we've all thought of it.........if it comes to that and i sure as heck hope it does....then i know that whoever dr. paul chooses will be the right choice.
although i do like the idea of willie as vp! what a riot! a long haired, ganja smoking, bio diesel powered country western singer!!! wouldn't that beat all!
although, badnarik is certainly a logical choice....

[Hamburglar]

Judge Napolitano!

That would be a good choice.

[sunny]

to you DjloTi -
we don't have 18 months dearheart we have seven........the primiaries!
if dr. paul doesn't make it there it's all over...

[Quantumystic]

ok folks,
got some interesting choices for vp..........isn't that a little of the cart before the horse?
i mean we've all thought of it.........if it comes to that and i sure as heck hope it does....then i know that whoever dr. paul chooses will be the right choice.
although i do like the idea of willie as vp! what a riot! a long haired, ganja smoking, bio diesel powered country western singer!!! wouldn't that beat all!
although, badnarik is certainly a logical choice....

Ironically, it occurs to me...

IF Dr. Paul was elected w/ Willie as his Veep... he would be the Best Guarded President in history.

Out of fear that Willie would "succeed" to the Presidency! :eek:

[UCFGavin]

Colin Powell?

[sunny]

hi again...........i forgot...i think edwin vieira (sp?) would make an excellent choice for vp!

[guntherg16]

Patrick J. Buchanan is my first choice.

Walter E. Williams second.

William Norman Grigg a real close third.

[LibertyEagle]

Colin Powell is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.