Video from ABC this morning:

[po14015]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKRwIm_N0vA

[pcosmar]

Thanks for the tube.
Just what I wanted to wake up to.
:)
:cool:

[Agorism]

Hope drudge posts this.

[specsaregood]

LOL @ how he wouldn't let georgie get a word in edgewise. that is how you do it Dr. Paul!

[acptulsa]

News recap: 'Intellectual godfather of the Tea Party', and 'Fierce critic of government spending.' I think we can take that.

But what's with the godfather talk? Not that its really an inaccurate way to describe it, but are they trying to get him confused with former Godfather's CEO Cain? Trying to fix it so half the public thinks he's racist and the other half think he's black?

[ronpaulitician]

I think it'll be helpful in the long run because it'll likely make Cain's "Godfather" useless.

[rp08orbust]

Trying to fix it so half the public thinks he's racist and the other half think he's black?

Or both! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHFUH_frhBw

[zacharyrow]

Stuck in what believes in, so it was a good interview. Never sway, Paul. Never. He made a great point about paying for someone who wants to live on the coast.

[TortoiseDream]

so george is a douchebag....

[sratiug]

Sounded like they had his microphone across the room somewhere. I think we need observers in the mixing rooms.

[Matthew Zak]

LOL @ how he wouldn't let georgie get a word in edgewise. that is how you do it Dr. Paul!

I think he realizes he needs to be more assertive this time around. :) The '07 announcement he was nothing if not cute about it. This time he's taking the bull by the horns!

[acptulsa]

I think he realizes he needs to be more assertive this time around. :) The '07 announcement he was nothing if not cute about it. This time he's taking the bull by the horns!

Good thing, too. Last round we dealt with quite enough of what comes out of the other end of the bull, thank you very much.

[sailingaway]

Argh! I haven't even gotten to Ron proper!! What is that asinine introduction 'he's against getting bin Laden [bull!] he wants to legalize drugs and prostition [decriminalize at the FEDERAL level for states to regulate!].......

OK, I'll go watch it, but my opinion of Streptococcus and his network is about what it was before.

[acptulsa]

OK, I'll go watch it, but my opinion of Streptococcus and his network is about what it was before.

All Bull Crap?

[sailingaway]

All Bull Crap?

That works. Ron has to watch for that 'stick the knife in in the introduction THEN ask a question' so the knife gets 'conceded'. He did at least say 'I want to qualify that drug bit' but could have said 'I think the states can pass those laws and the question of heroin legalization is unlikely to be seriously raised in any state. I had been responding to an unserious question.' Then moving on. But there was clearly a mike problem of some sort. Not a great interview, actually, they advertised him as fringe throughout. He might have been better to go with Cavuto who wouldn't have done that (even the Judge is doing it, lauding him as going to 'end social security and legalize drugs' even though the judge knows better.)

Well, I guess we're in campaign mode, and have to use the media regardless of its spin, and just take that into account.

I used to call this guy Stuffafffufa because I couldn't be bothered to learn his real name, but I saw on this forum that it is really Streptococcus, so I will try to remember in the future.

[specsaregood]

That works. Ron has to watch for that 'stick the knife in in the introduction THEN ask a question' so the knife gets 'conceded'. He did at least say 'I want to qualify that drug bit' but could have said 'I think the states can pass those laws and the question of heroin legalization is unlikely to be seriously raised in any state. I had been responding to an unserious question.' Then moving on. But there was clearly a mike problem of some sort.

I think Dr. Paul stuck to his message and the answers he wanted to give. He handled it great by refusing to be cutoff and continuing as long as he damn well pleased.

[sailingaway]

I think Dr. Paul stuck to his message and the answers he wanted to give. He handled it great by refusing to be cutoff and continuing as long as he damn well pleased.

Yeah, but it could be taken more than one way. I think Ron is great, and the ones the networks want to paint as mainstream never get the crap he deals with all the time from media.

[eqcitizen]

This whole bin laden thing might hurt him with the die hard conservatives. He position is the correct one and i love the Nazi prosecution analogy but average america might not get the nuance.

[Matt Collins]

Sounded like they had his microphone across the room somewhere. I think we need observers in the mixing rooms.
Yeah... lots of first order reflections in there.

[Don Lapre]

What is that asinine introduction 'he's against getting bin Laden [bull!] he wants to legalize drugs and prostition [decriminalize at the FEDERAL level for states to regulate!].......

It's how it's gonna be throughout the whole campaign.

NO way the bootlickers are going to give the - one candidate who truly wants to give the government back to the people - a fair shake.

Not happenin'.

[sailingaway]

I love him using his declaration speech to rebut Streptococcus!

[mcgraw_wv]

Honestly, that interview did nothing to elevate RP, he needs to stop providing easy points to attack him... There is no need to criticize the OBL raid... and now that's all anyone wants to talk about. For what was supposed to be a large announcement, it was flat, and uneffective for the audience.

[pcosmar]

There is no need to criticize the OBL raid....

Why?
It was a farce done for political points.
You don't really believe that shit do you.

p.s. Bin Laden has been dead for 10 years.

[acptulsa]

Honestly, that interview did nothing to elevate RP, he needs to stop providing easy points to attack him...

No? But truth is treason in the Empire of Lies, and anyone who speaks the truth will be attacked for it. So, under these conditions, does he lie or does he deal with attacks? Either/or.

[specsaregood]

Honestly, that interview did nothing to elevate RP, he needs to stop providing easy points to attack him... There is no need to criticize the OBL raid... and now that's all anyone wants to talk about. For what was supposed to be a large announcement, it was flat, and uneffective for the audience.

He was asked about it AND he had to rebut the smears/spin against him on the OBL issue.
Not only that, but failing to attack Obama's mishandling of the OBL raid could very well be the same as conceding the general election to him. This is something the other republican candidates are going to realize sooner or later.

[CUnknown]

LOL @ how he wouldn't let georgie get a word in edgewise. that is how you do it Dr. Paul!

God yes ... it was such a beautiful thing to watch him just talk over that douchebag. George better listen and maybe he'll learn something!

[rockandrollsouls]

This was an awful appearance. No filter at all. Those seeing him for the first few times would have likely been completely turned off by the way he phrased things here.

Ron did not perform well. I really cringed at that.

[rockandrollsouls]

The campaign should be coaching him on how to respond to attacks like this. Example, when asked why he shouldn't run as an independent, he should have hammered home the point he is a true republican, it is some of his fellow candidates that aren't, and that even Reagan endorsed him.

When asked about foreign policy, he should have said he is steadfast in the Republican view of foreign policy; a strong defense.

And the issue about FEMA and the home, he could have phrased it much, much better. He needed to stress that he is never for anyone losing their home in a circumstance like that, but he believes that there are more efficient ways than FEMA to handle it. He could have cited the poor job they did in a number of disasters.

The former are not my own viewpoints; rather, I'm simply summing up the stances of Ron in an easily digestible format for the masses.

Terrible performance. I'm convinced we will lose now....the campaign is CLUELESS.


No? But truth is treason in the Empire of Lies, and anyone who speaks the truth will be attacked for it. So, under these conditions, does he lie or does he deal with attacks? Either/or.

[zacharyrow]

The campaign should be coaching him on how to respond to attacks like this. Example, when asked why he shouldn't run as an independent, he should have hammered home the point he is a true republican, it is some of his fellow candidates that aren't, and that even Reagan endorsed him.

When asked about foreign policy, he should have said he is steadfast in the Republican view of foreign policy; a strong defense.

And the issue about FEMA and the home, he could have phrased it much, much better. He needed to stress that he is never for anyone losing their home in a circumstance like that, but he believes that there are more efficient ways than FEMA to handle it. He could have cited the poor job they did in a number of disasters.

Terrible performance. I'm convinced we will lose now....the campaign is CLUELESS.

So, I guess no more posts from you now? Since we've already lost.

[rockandrollsouls]

Typical attitude here. If you're not evoking scences from Braveheart it's not good enough. I want to win and the strategy you've supported is not conducive to winning. This was proved in 1988 and 2008.

Of course, feel free to ignore everything else in my constructive post except for the part that sets you off.

[zacharyrow]

Typical attitude here. If you're not evoking scence from Braveheart it's not good enough. I want to win and the strategy you've supported is not conducive to winning. This was proved in 1988 and 2008.

Of course, feel free to ignore everything else in my constructive post except for the part that sets you off.

Well because the last lines makes the rest of your post pointless. Why offer constructive criticism when it's a lost cause?

[pcosmar]

Typical attitude here. If you're not evoking scences from Braveheart it's not good enough. I want to win and the strategy you've supported is not conducive to winning. This was proved in 1988 and 2008.

Of course, feel free to ignore everything else in my constructive post except for the part that sets you off.

Cool, Nothing constructive=ignore all.

[rockandrollsouls]

Post before that one, which was a response to the troll that joined a month ago.

But feel free to stay grinning while we're losing, again. You guys want to stick with the same tactics because it feeds your ego and you hear what you want to hear. "Oh my if Ron isn't constantly feeding me ear candy about the dollar and closing all the departments I think I'll explode."




Cool, Nothing constructive=ignore all.

[The Moravian]

Why?
It was a farce done for political points.
You don't really believe that shit do you.

p.s. Bin Laden has been dead for 10 years.

Whatever the real truth about OBL is, it is all in the past now since he is certainly dead now. The points we need to make to win people over must be:

1. Concrete - not theoretical statements that aren't connected to action. Theoretical musings result in the Civil Rights Act trap that Rand got attacked with last year and are getting RP into a similar trap by second-guessing the assassination of OBL.

2. Positive - What DO we want, instead of only saying what DON'T we want. "Restore the American dream of free people charting their own course and deciding for themselves in a free market instead of the federal government planning their lives for them and limiting their choices..."

3.Decisive - After 9/11, Dr. Paul immediately called for letters of marque and reprisal to target the terrorists, introduced laws restoring the right to self-defense to the airline companies and demanded that the President enforce immigration laws that would keep our country safer than violating our rights with the PATRIOT Act, creating the TSA and waging undeclared wars against countries not shown to be involved in the attacks.

[zacharyrow]

Post before that one, which was a response to the troll that joined a month ago.

But feel free to stay grinning while we're losing, again. You guys want to stick with the same tactics because it feeds your ego and you hear what you want to hear. "Oh my if Ron isn't constantly feeding me ear candy about the dollar and closing all the departments I think I'll explode."

What makes me a troll? The fact that I joined a month ago? I don't understand your reasoning behind that. I'm not going to get into an argument about who knows or has supported Ron Paul the longest, because that is just silly.

The fact is you said he will lose and I figured since you know that you'd stop posting. If you want to continue supporting a campaign that is "CLUELESS" (your words, not mine) then go ahead.

[rockandrollsouls]

The fact you take something I say and attempt to relate it to something completely unrelated.

Ex. Opinion we will lose by using same failed strategy = So you won't be posting/supporting since you think we will lose.

You must be, what, 18-20? I suggest you delete your former posts, as you managed to spin something that could be incredibly beneficial into a flamewar now.


What makes me a troll? The fact that I joined a month ago? I don't understand your reasoning behind that. I'm not going to get into an argument about who knows or has supported Ron Paul the longest, because that is just silly.

The fact is you said he will lose and I figured since you know that you'd stop posting. If you want to continue supporting a campaign that is "CLUELESS" (your words, not mine) then go ahead.

[zacharyrow]

The fact you take something I say and attempt to relate it to something completely unrelated.

Ex. Opinion we will lose by using same failed strategy = So you won't be posting/supporting since you think we will lose.

You must be, what, 18-20? I suggest you delete your former posts, as you managed to spin something that could be incredibly beneficial into a flamewar now.


You came on here having a tirade and calling the campaign clueless, and said we have no chance because you don't like how things are going.....hm. What are you 8-10?

[rockandrollsouls]

Exactly. The way Ron is speaking now on some of these issues makes it sound like he wouldn't have done anything. He needs to explain that he was the one that wanted to act first, immediately, and in the most efficient manner.

Letters of Marque, alternatives to some of these big government programs that are more efficient and beneficial.

He needs to hammer home he is a republican, and the best republican.


Whatever the real truth about OBL is, it is all in the past now since he is certainly dead now. The points we need to make to win people over must be:

1. Concrete - not theoretical statements that aren't connected to action. Theoretical musings result in the Civil Rights Act trap that Rand got attacked with last year and are getting RP into a similar trap by second-guessing the assassination of OBL.

2. Positive - What DO we want, instead of only saying what DON'T we want. "Restore the American dream of free people charting their own course and deciding for themselves in a free market instead of the federal government planning their lives for them and limiting their choices..."

3.Decisive - After 9/11, Dr. Paul immediately called for letters of marque and reprisal to target the terrorists, introduced laws restoring the right to self-defense to the airline companies and demanded that the President enforce immigration laws that would keep our country safer than violating our rights with the PATRIOT Act, creating the TSA and waging undeclared wars against countries not shown to be involved in the attacks.

[LibertyEagle]

The campaign should be coaching him on how to respond to attacks like this. Example, when asked why he shouldn't run as an independent, he should have hammered home the point he is a true republican, it is some of his fellow candidates that aren't, and that even Reagan endorsed him.

When asked about foreign policy, he should have said he is steadfast in the Republican view of foreign policy; a strong defense.

And the issue about FEMA and the home, he could have phrased it much, much better. He needed to stress that he is never for anyone losing their home in a circumstance like that, but he believes that there are more efficient ways than FEMA to handle it. He could have cited the poor job they did in a number of disasters.

The former are not my own viewpoints; rather, I'm simply summing up the stances of Ron in an easily digestible format for the masses.

Sadly, I've got to say that I agree with you. But, there's not much we can do. Dr. Paul is going to do what he is going to do.

[rockandrollsouls]

Here we go. Can one of the mods stomp this out please?


You came on here having a tirade and calling the campaign clueless, and said we have no chance because you don't like how things are going.....hm. What are you 8-10?

[pcosmar]

Whatever the real truth about OBL is, it is all in the past now since he is certainly dead now. The points we need to make to win people over must be:

1. Concrete -
He was very concrete in Exeter.
He explained his position clearly. I really don't get what the criticism is.

[rockandrollsouls]

I don't know Ron personally, but he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that would turn down some gentle coaching or tips if it meant he could become president and stand a hope of saving the country. Couldn't the campaign explain that he'd just be working on his delivery? I mean, it seemed like he was much more prepared at the debate then he was on GMA. Could it be that he was consciously on his game at the debate, and it slipped his mind that the TV appearance was just as important? Honestly, to me it was like watching two different people.

If I had any closer connection to his campaign I'd really try to hammer it home with them.


Sadly, I've got to say that I agree with you. But, there's not much we can do. Dr. Paul is going to do what he is going to do. (sigh)

[acptulsa]

Post before that one, which was a response to the troll that joined a month ago.

But feel free to stay grinning while we're losing, again. You guys want to stick with the same tactics because it feeds your ego and you hear what you want to hear. "Oh my if Ron isn't constantly feeding me ear candy about the dollar and closing all the departments I think I'll explode."

You want to change Ron Paul, you want to change us, you want to change the voters, and I agree. But there's a fine line between 'constructive' and 'wishful' and you're way over it.

The voters are changing. They're figuring out where sticking with the slick has gotten them. Ron Paul is standing fast, as he always has, and we're bringing the nation to him. But whine about it all you want, whether we need to hear it or not. It isn't like I haven't said I wish he'd hire a speech writer...

[acptulsa]

Here we go. Can one of the mods stomp this out please?

Considering he's trying to play down your assertion we're all wasting our time here, I doubt it. Yes, Paul was concrete on The View and they loved it. No, he doesn't always do that. Sometimes it's hard to come up with the perfect concrete example when the TV lights are shining in your face and the host is trying desperately to interrupt you because what you are saying still makes too much sense. Yes his suit is off the rack.

And maybe all this unconventionality is a liability and maybe, in a time when everyone is sick of the status quo, it's an asset. Or, perhaps, we should wait and see what the campaign is up to when it's a full day old.

But there's one thing I know as surely as I know my own name. The proverbial fat lady ain't sung yet.

[pcosmar]

First off. He didn't lose last time. The Revolution grew.
The people are much more receptive to the message of Liberty.

As far as the wars. He is absolutely right. What he voted for and authorized was never done and what was done was not what he voted for.
And was monumentally stupid on top.

I also find that most people that pick up on his recommendation of "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" have absolutly no idea what it is or means.
The Drug War is a monumental failure. On several levels.
The economic issues are his strong point and he hammered those.

Either people are NOT listening, or they are confused. I expect support to grow as more hear him, and the Media Blackout is not going to work this time.

[The Moravian]

That works. Ron has to watch for that 'stick the knife in in the introduction THEN ask a question' so the knife gets 'conceded'. He did at least say 'I want to qualify that drug bit' but could have said 'I think the states can pass those laws and the question of heroin legalization is unlikely to be seriously raised in any state. I had been responding to an unserious question.' Then moving on. But there was clearly a mike problem of some sort. Not a great interview, actually, they advertised him as fringe throughout. He might have been better to go with Cavuto who wouldn't have done that (even the Judge is doing it, lauding him as going to 'end social security and legalize drugs' even though the judge knows better.)

Well, I guess we're in campaign mode, and have to use the media regardless of its spin, and just take that into account.

I used to call this guy Stuffafffufa because I couldn't be bothered to learn his real name, but I saw on this forum that it is really Streptococcus, so I will try to remember in the future.

I agree that Neil Cavuto or maybe Dylan Ratigan would have been better hosts for this very important announcement, they certainly wouldn't have set RP up with that chopped up clip of the radio interview and all the subtle insults that Snuffellupagus spewed at him. After that cynical, mocking insult back in 2007 I would hope that Dr. Paul would know better than to declare his candidacy on this evil man's show. Why give a known backstabber that kind of opportunity?

I do like that RP talked over him, but even that didn't redeem the situation he put himself into. Going on "Good Morning America" is necessary during the campaign, because they have such a large audience, but choosing to announce your official candidacy on that show may not have been such a good idea.

Perhaps the Sunday morning show interview will be more fair to him. I just hope that he is prepared for the worst every time he's on national television.

[AuH20]

Argh! I haven't even gotten to Ron proper!! What is that asinine introduction 'he's against getting bin Laden [bull!] he wants to legalize drugs and prostition [decriminalize at the FEDERAL level for states to regulate!].......OK, I'll go watch it, but my opinion of Streptococcus and his network is about what it was before.

You're surprised by this? I told you this would happen yesterday and everyone was calling me Chicken Little. He's been officially stamped and labeled. The problem is that besides Ron there is no other quality candidate in the Republican field. For all intents and purpose, we're chained to this sinking ship for good or bad. It's time to pull out the stops and advocate radical methods.

[acptulsa]

IWhy give a known backstabber that kind of opportunity?

I do like that RP talked over him, but even that didn't redeem the situation enough to make it worth it.

I think so. No one knows better than older people that life was easier back when Washington was smaller. So, get on the actual airwaves and stick in their faces the reason they're all so negative about him--they hate him. And show them why--they don't want the man reminding everyone that life was better for the majority of people before this federal morass grew out of control.

Older folks aren't so fond of good men being mistreated. They don't like it. Their sympathies invariably are with the maligned, not the naysayers.

He announced in the right place.


You're surprised by this? I told you this would happen yesterday and everyone was calling me Chicken Little.

Were people calling you this because no one believed it would happen, or because no one believed that he would handle it so poorly that the campaign would end before it started.

The proverbial fat lady ain't even warming up yet.

[rockandrollsouls]

No, I want to win. That's not changing the voters. Hell, I believe a lot of people are libertarian at heart. I know I was, but you need to convey that message in a way that doesn't offend or intimidate people.

It's not changing Ron at all. It's changing the campaign. I also find your statement funny, because isn't this about the Constitution, not that man? I think I remember you and a few others here preaching that....so you're telling me "Oh you won't change Ron" but isn't this presidency we've been pushing for about the principles? Ron's just the messenger, and if he's delivering the message I want as many people to embrace it as possible.


You want to change Ron Paul, you want to change us, you want to change the voters, and I agree. But there's a fine line between 'constructive' and 'wishful' and you're way over it.

The voters are changing. They're figuring out where sticking with the slick has gotten them. Ron Paul is standing fast, as he always has, and we're bringing the nation to him. But whine about it all you want, whether we need to hear it or not. It isn't like I haven't said I wish he'd hire a speech writer...

[rockandrollsouls]

The only reason they continue with these loaded questions is because they know Ron just makes himself look worse when he responds to it. How much money you want to put on the idea that if Ron hit homeruns with 'em like he was beginning to do at the first debate that they'd back off a little bit?


I think so. No one knows better than older people that life was easier back when Washington was smaller. So, get on the actual airwaves and stick in their faces the reason they're all so negative about him--they hate him. And show them why--they don't want the man reminding everyone that life was better for the majority of people before this federal morass grew out of control.

Older folks aren't so fond of good men being mistreated. They don't like it. Their sympathies invariably are with the maligned, not the naysayers.

He announced in the right place.



Were people calling you this because no one believed it would happen, or because no one believed that he would handle it so poorly that the campaign would end before it started.

The proverbial fat lady ain't even warming up yet.

[AuH20]

The only reason they continue with these loaded questions is because they know Ron just makes himself look worse when he responds to it. How much money you want to put on the idea that if Ron hit homeruns with 'em like he was beginning to do at the first debate that they'd back off a little bit?

Does he have a campaign manager or does he simply respond extemporaneously to every question without understanding how it will be spinned by the media?

[pcosmar]

Does he have a campaign manager or does he simply respond extemparaneously to every question without understanding how it will be spinned by the media?

He tells the truth. He lets the truth stands on it's own.
Spin is a lie. Lies will make themselves known.

[acptulsa]

Does he have a campaign manager or does he simply respond extemporaneously to every question..?

Yes.

And he has a pretty good idea how a crowd will respond by now. Does this mean he should do without a speech writer when he's too busy to craft words very, very carefully? Well, we'll see what happens.

I think there are just too many wordsmiths on this forum who are too full of sour grapes. Maybe what we all need to do is stfu on this subject and run for Congress. If you want something done right...


Spin is a lie.

No, sorry, can't agree with this one. Any truth can be told in more than one way. Some do work better than others.

[AuH20]

No, sorry, can't agree with this one. Any truth can be told in more than one way. Some do work better than others.

Yes, you can tell the truth without throwing a brick into the proverbial face of your audience. Ron hasn't learned this art.

[acptulsa]

Well? Can we have a 'all the bitchers for Congress to show us how it's done' moneybomb?

[pcosmar]

Yes, you can tell the truth without throwing a brick in the proverbial face of your audience. Ron hasn't learned this art.

What brick?
He said that he would not have done it the way it was done.
He says the government has NO business in your life Mind, Body Or Spirit.(DEA or FDA)
What brick?

[acptulsa]

What brick?
He said that he would not have done it the way it was done.
He says the government has NO business in your life Mind, Body Or Spirit.(DEA or FDA)
What brick?

If someone throws a piece of candy in your face and the MSM tells you it's a brick, do you unwrap it? Depends on how wise you are.

[rockandrollsouls]

He does, but you'd never guess it judging by how unpolished responses are most of the time.


Does he have a campaign manager or does he simply respond extemporaneously to every question without understanding how it will be spinned by the media?

[rockandrollsouls]

Bingo. Or the campaign hasn't helped to make him aware yet.


Yes, you can tell the truth without throwing a brick into the proverbial face of your audience. Ron hasn't learned this art.


Loser talk. You're basically saying "If everyone doesn't realize how awesome Ron is, I don't care! Don't change a thing! Let's lose again!" Take your elitist attitude and shove it. You're part of that 1% on each end of the bell curve I consistently say we shouldn't worry about winning. You're so caught up on every, little, minor detail that it's impossible to satisfy you.


He tells the truth. He lets the truth stands on it's own.
Spin is a lie. Lies will make themselves known.

[AuH20]

He does, but you'd never guess it judging by how unpolished responses are most of the time.

He's been beaten down by the media for so long that he doesn't possess any type of survival instincts any longer. He's embraced the crazy old man persona they've crafted for him!!! It seems he's gotten more incredulous as he's gotten older. I think he's resigned to the fact that he can't win and now has taken off on the shock tour.

[ravedown]

George should have just introduced him as "Ron Paul, terrorist sympathizer and heroin advocate." that's how it sounded to me.

[AuH20]

Bingo. Or the campaign hasn't helped to make him aware yet.




Loser talk. You're basically saying "If everyone doesn't realize how awesome Ron is, I don't care! Don't change a thing! Let's lose again!" Take your elitist attitude and shove it. You're part of that 1% on each end of the bell curve I consistently say we shouldn't worry about winning. You're so caught up on every, little, minor detail that it's impossible to satisfy you.

There is far too much group thought in here. At some point, you need examine the polling numbers and arrive at the objective conclusion that we can't blame it exclusively on "the sheep" or "the biased media." Ron could light himself on fire in the middle of a debate and there would be people here telling us it was a brillant campaign move.

[pcosmar]

Ron said he would not have ordered the assault. It was both illegal and immoral and he would not have done it.
He said he would have handled the whole thing differently from the start.
He proposed a different option way back then. It was rejected, and pointless expensive wars were chosen instead.

Ron said he would not have done so, nor would he order the assassination of a suspected but untried individual.

[pcosmar]

George should have just introduced him as "Ron Paul, terrorist sympathizer and heroin advocate." that's how it sounded to me.

Well that was his intent and how he presented it. That shit is to be expected.
I thought Ron handled it well. He fully intends to END the War on Drugs.

It is long overdue.

[AuH20]

Well that was his intent and how he presented it. That shit is to be expected.
I thought Ron handled it well. He fully intends to END the War on Drugs.

It is long overdue.

I agree with ending the war on drugs, but how did this become a top flight issue overnight? Wait. I think I know. Someone gave Chris Wallace exactly what he wanted.

[theberkeyguy]

So glad to see Ron Paul running!

theberkeyguy

[sailingaway]

I agree with ending the war on drugs, but how did this become a top flight issue overnight? Wait. I think I know. Someone gave Chris Wallace exactly what he wanted.

Wallace pushed that question on purpose as if it were 'Ron's issue' and using heroin which Ron has never even mentioned before so far as I know.

[AuH20]

Wallace pushed that question on purpose as if it were 'Ron's issue' and using heroin which Ron has never even mentioned before so far as I know.

Someone should kick Chris Wallace's ass, but that's besides the point, If Ron wants to truthfully answer these third-rail questions ever again, he should have said, "This isn't a critical issue at the moment, but I have a comprehensive plan to end the war of drugs on my website, which should alleviate the common concerns." Bang. Bomb defused. No hyperbole about heroin use.

With that said, these types of multi-faceted questions are completely inappropiate in the debate format we're familiar with. Experts have wrote tomes about drug policies and you're not going to able properly encapsulate all angles of a solution into a 3 minute answer session. It's like asking someone? "How would you stop world hunger?" And then having the candidate blathering about some abstract constant without specifics.

[pcosmar]

I agree with ending the war on drugs, but how did this become a top flight issue overnight? Wait. I think I know. Someone gave Chris Wallace exactly what he wanted.
GOOD

It is long past due.
It has been getting empty lip service since the 70s. It needs to be addressed. It is the major reason for the Police State we have today.
It is the center of Civil Liberties Violations. (something the republicans used to feign respect for)

It very well could bring out the silent majority of potential voters.(Independents)

[acptulsa]

Oh for God's sake. Keep hammering it. Hammer it all the way to China.

I don't want to do this so I need the government to make it illegal so I won't do it. There's a reason that got such a strong reaction--it's funny and it's a good point all at once. "This isn't a critical issue at the moment, but I have a comprehensive plan to end the war of drugs on my website, which should alleviate the common concerns." is a nice, safe way to put people to sleep.

[TIMB0B]

Ron could light himself on fire in the middle of a debate and there would be people here telling us it was a brillant campaign move.

Lol!

[acptulsa]

Ron could light himself on fire in the middle of a debate and there would be people here telling us it was a brillant campaign move.

And he could fire the imaginations of a billion voters and there would be people here telling us that it was the death blow to his campaign.

Argh! He won over millions but my Uncle George, who hated him before, still hates him! We're going to lose!

Anyone who can't take the notion that we could still be free of a massive scourge of heroin even without a federal law against it was never, never, ever going to vote for Ron Paul under any circumstances. Do we really need to cry over them for a week straight?