Ron Paul on Lou Dobbs

Finally, a cable news station has taken note of Ron Paul:

Over at Reason Magazine, David Weigel notes: “It’s odd to see Paul in this format. He really doesn’t get the language of these cable appearences; he couldn’t dodge a question if it was tossed 100 feet over his head.”

And he’s right. Paul’s candor comes across to viewers when he is on TV. And while it is certainly unusual for a politician, it is also quite refreshing.

5 Responses to “Ron Paul on Lou Dobbs”

  1. R Says:

    Nice to finally see Ron getting some national media coverage. I’m surprised that Big Media which is totally against the war isn’t promoting an anti-war republican like Dr. Paul more.

  2. VoteRonPaul08 Says:

    If you support liberty and an America you can be proud of, we all need to donate to this nobel man. I suggest $20 a/month or higher should you want to reach your maximum contribution limit of either $2,300 (single) or $4,600 (married). For as little as $5/week you can really change America!

  3. John M. Andre Says:

    I usually like what I read from Ron Paul and I like this clip as well. I do wish him luck. If he wins, I might return to the US.

  4. Vox Libertatis Says:

    Dear “R”,
    Do you really think “Big Media” is[sic] “totally against the war”? Why would they be against the war? “Big Media” is more or less synonymous with “Big Government”, and big government can only lead to global government. The War on Terror is very solid platform upon which to trample Constitutional Liberties and transfer power out of the hands of Congress, thereby strengthening Big Government.
    Furthermore, the totally false premise of the War on Iraq will eventually only serve to strengthen the United Nations’ power over the United States, which is now viewed by the world as a rogue nation.
    So if Big Media, or Liberal Media (another deceptive appellation), are pro-global government, then what better position to be in? They can put up a beautiful facade of being against the war, and still benefit from the destruction it, along with the Patriot Act, is wreaking on U.S. sovereignty.
    You see, we need to stop being suckered into this fallacious mindset of the liberal-conservative struggle. It doesn’t exist. To quote my own bad self: The only difference between “conservative” and “liberal” in today’s landscape is this: are we going to go clockwise or counter-clockwise around the Constitution to achieve global government?
    I would not be the least bit surprised that the Mainstream Media and the pseudo-conservative talk show hosts are united in their attempt to silence and discredit Ron Paul. He is pro-small government, pro-restoration of commonsense foreign policy, pro-Constitutional Balance of Power, against big government, against the Patriot Act, against the transfer of power to the Executive Branch, and against all the other stones on the path to global government.

  5. political forum Says:

    It is generally very hard for a third party candidate to win the Presidency. I think it’s only happened two times before in American history, once with Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans and arguable another time with Zachary Taylor and the Whigs in 1848. Other than that, the system tends to favor two parties. I think there would have to be a mass defection from both the Democratic and Republican parties to allow for that sort of thing.

    - roger

Leave a Reply