1. Michael says

    I agree with the first poster. I’ve noticed that pretty much all LGBTQ media simply repeats the mainstream word for boring tired word when it comes to Ron Paul.

    Have you ever actually listened to Ron Pauls message? Haven’t you ever wondered WHY his supporters are so “Rabid”? Haven’t you ever wondered why the United States Military (Active and vets) support Ron 5 to 1 against ALL other candidates… COMBINED?

    Haven’t you ever stopped and thought “Hmmm the mainstream media is doing everything it can to marginalize Ron Paul. The Dems AND the Repubs….Hmmmmmm” No?

    Never stopped to wonder why ALL mainstream news outlets gang up on him and call him names like “Rabid”? They used to call us all kinds of names too. Heck, some of them still do. Or did that slip your mind?

  2. LOLS says

    Occupy was far from rabid, it wouldn’t be an appropriate term. Don’t be dumb.

    Personal politics aside, this is an incredibly tasteless, generally horrible thing to say.

  3. Stefan says

    I agree with the first two comments. Ron Paul might not have the smoothest rhetorical delivery anymore, might make a few gaffes, and might have a few minor skeletons in his political closet. But that can be said of any politician around as long as him (seriously–dozens upon dozens at every level). The ideas that he represents represent an important alternative path, and they deserve no more marginalization than the frankly extreme positions of both parties. Instead we’ll be having yet another election in which the two party machine hijacks all independent thought.

  4. LOLS says

    Not to mention the fact that looking at the comments below that video we find the majority of them are from one poster vitriolically defending Ron Paul against any and all attackers. Which adjective would you prefer to rabid? Overzealous?

  5. jamal49 says

    OK. Let’s just set aside that Ron Paul is not the Cassandra of republicon politics–a misunderstood prophet who is marginalized not by his extreme, libertarian philosophy but by evil powers who want to keep America from hearing the truth.

    All one had to do was watch this speech in its entirety to understand that Ron Paul is truly a “fringe” candidate. Considering that his named political party, the “Republican” party, is about as radical and fringe as it gets, that’s no mean feat.

    Paul’s libertarian message is attractive, except at those crucial points that would identify a true libertarian: gay rights and the rights of a woman to control her reproductive life.

    In these two matters alone, Ron Paul disqualifies himself from any serious consideration as a legitimate candidate and exposes his hypocrisy. He favours using the power of the state to keep gay couples from enjoying the same freedoms that Ron Paul takes as his birthright and to keep a woman from the same freedoms that Ron Paul, a man, takes as his birthright.

    Ron Paul is an intellectual and political fraud. Drink at the well of his lunacy with caution. You will get poisoned.

  6. Jack M says

    And when Ron was finished with his speech, monkeys flew out of his butt. He’s crazier than a bedbug.

  7. Jason says

    Ron Paul was the only Republican candidate running this year who 1) opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, 2) opposed a ban on gay marriage, 3) supported internet freedom 4) opposed ndaa’s ability to indefinitely detain american citizens…all of which distinguish him not only from his Republican opponents but the current President, as well.

  8. Matt in NYC says

    Blake, Gary Johnson didn’t get the same traction as Dr. Paul, but I’d argue that most of the positive things that have been said about Paul could be said about him too.

  9. woodroad34 says

    If Romney is, indeed, planning on dong a “tribute” to Ron Paul, he might want to read the NYT’s article about Ron, who doesn’t fully support Romney:

    “Mr. Paul, in an interview, said convention planners had offered him an opportunity to speak under two conditions: that he deliver remarks vetted by the Romney campaign, and that he give a full-fledged endorsement of Mr. Romney. He declined.

    “It wouldn’t be my speech,” Mr. Paul said. “That would undo everything I’ve done in the last 30 years. I don’t fully endorse him for president.”

  10. anon says

    His true moment was trying to prevent the bank bailout, which most of the Democrats went along with because of their ties to Fanny and Freddie, but he only succeeded on the first vote. It hasn’t been a fun 12 years. Clinton started the ball rolling the the repeal of Glass-Steagall (to get R. votes out of Tom Delay), which precipitated the banking crisis by killing off the bank insurance market. Recreating a private banking insurance market would go a long way of removing the crony-ist govt. based insurance we have now.

  11. BobN says

    The fact that Ron Paul, after so many years, has become, in the eyes of some, the best Republican out there is not a reflection on the quality of Ron Paul…

  12. ChristopherM says

    Good god the Paultards love to swarm whenever that elfen little nutbag is mentioned. Pick your bongs back up kids. No rational person is interested in this isolationist racist fool.

  13. anonymous says

    Michael said:
    “Haven’t you ever wondered why the United States Military (Active and vets) support Ron 5 to 1 against ALL other candidates… COMBINED?”

    Site your source, please.