Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

Ron Paul endorsed by Jane Roe, yes, THAT Roe

What a coincidence!

On the 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court's historic Roe vs. Wade abortion ruling, the Roe of that landmark legal case endorsed libertarian turned Republican Rep. Ron Paul for president. Paul, a 10-term Texas congressman from the Houston area, is a 72-year-old Air Force veteran and ob-gyn who has surprised many political observers with the fervor of his bands of followers, not to mention his campaign's fundraising prowess that has outshined other Republican so-called front-runners.

"Jane Roe," whose real name is Norma McCorvey, turned against abortion a decade ago. In her endorsement Tuesday she said, "I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v. Wade. He has never wavered....

on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn."

Not surprisingly, Paul accepted the endorsement and said, "As much as I talk about economic liberties, and civil liberties and trying to avoid the killing overseas, I think the issue of life is paramount."

As outlined on his website, Paul's positions, which generally involve drastically cutting the federal government and ending the Iraq war as soon as possible, have attracted an eclectic band of disaffected but determined Democrats, Republicans and libertarians who gather online and in some 1,400 meet-up groups around the country to plan all kinds of imaginative demonstrations of their support.

Their devotion and donations made Paul likely the most successful Republican presidential fundraiser in the fourth quarter, accumulating some $20 million while other alleged front-runners had a difficult time and, like Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani, are now forced to trim campaign operations. According to Paul's website, he has raised another $3.3 million this quarter, enabling him to campaign and advertise widely.

Paul has consistently lagged far behind in the polls, which his fans say are frauds perpetrated by a corporate media determined to crush him,. However, Paul beat Giuliani in Iowa and Fred Thompson (who dropped out Tuesday) in New Hampshire, despite being barred from the GOP debate by Fox News, and came in a distant second in Nevada, beating all the Republican contenders except Mitt Romney.

In Florida today, however, we saw another side to the Paul campaign's passion as a band of his followers, instead of trying to present their candidate's case, banded together with some antiabortion protestors to prevent a Giuliani news conference in Palm Beach Gardens. At first the Paul followers, who have shadowed Giuliani in an attempt to gather publicity from a media that largely ignores the long-shot Paul, simply waved signs behind Giuliani's head to get them in TV pictures.

But when the former New York mayor attempted to hold a brief news conference, the Paul supporters joined with some antiabortion activists to shout the candidate down. According to the Associated Press, after several minutes of attempting to answer reporters' questions on Iraq, the economy and his campaign, Giuliani gave up in the din. And the news session moved inside.

--Andrew Malcolm

 
Comments () | Archives (87)

The comments to this entry are closed.

While some people might think the Paul supporters should have been more polite, I think that they were justified. Mr. Guliani's many passionate, knowledgeable supporters are welcome to show up at a Ron Paul event and try and justify their support for Mr. Guliani. Obviously, they know there's a line that the Constitution draws and that journalistic etiquette draws, and, well, no matter how bad the news wants to make magic with Guliani's message, Paul supporters will always be there to make their voices heard. Now, that's even when it annoys the hell out of you.

Bummer? Maybe for you. Justified? Hells yeah it is, open the Constitution.

"Paul has consistently lagged far behind in the polls, which his fans say are frauds perpetrated by a corporate media determined to crush him,"

As a Paul supporter I think you should frame this quote in bronze. Oh the Drama! Priceless.

keeping his eye on the prize. it's happening.

Andrew,

You got it all wrong again! We Paul supporters don't just wave signs behind Giuliani's head. We wave them behind his whole body: his psterior, his back...anywhere you find Giuliani, you'll find ron Paul signs trailing his elbows. I heard that someone stuck a rEVOLution sticker to his tie and somoene tatooed the entire Constitution on the back of his enormous teeth while he was sleeping (though it might have been Huckabee because people confuse weasel teeth with beaver teeth).

Don't get me wrong, I like Giuliani. Being a child who is afraid of the dark, I need his protection from terrorists and I celebrate his brithday every September eleventh. I'm just saying that, if his Secret Service agents cannot protect him on the way to his current mistress'/next wife's house, we're gonna put some stickers on the guy. It's not wrong to advertise and I'm sure he thinks it's funny because he's always wearing that supecilious smile.

We're equal opportunity about this, by the way. We don't just put stickers on the long-shot darkhorses with low prmary numbers and quixotic bids for the White House. We've affixed stickers to Romney's frosted temples, Fred Thompson's trophy wife, and McCain's Senate record. We put a Hillary Sticker on Obama and an Obama sticker on Wolf Blitzer. Wolf Blitzer punched John Edwards with his Bill Richardson ring so that's gonna leave a cool-looking bruise, but any bruise on John Edwards' face would be cool-looking.

Finally, get your facts straight. We don't shadow Giuliani. He's always following us looking for fundraising tips. We decided to start a money bomb for him on the anniversary of Demagoguery Day (it's a holiday in Venezeula). Statistics show that Giuliani has a good chance of out-fundrasing Paul and sweeping the election...wait...no, the statistics don't show that.

You gotta love Doctor Paul. I surely would not want a doctor that is not as respectful of life as he is. I was initially against Ron Paul when I first heard of him and was going to take my normal anarchistic view of life. Make enough money to do what I want, obey the rules, go to another country where the rules are OK if you really want to do something like have an abortion in another country or another state in the United States that allows it.

You have to respect the abortion doctors as well. I'm sure there will be some state that accepts their practice to support the free thinking decisions of Americans. There really are cases you don't want to have a baby. Lot's of cases, like incest where it would damage our species and common worldwide social values. You must think about the rest of the world. Talk to them, trade with them..

I mean, the more and more I listen to Doctor Paul, the more awake I feel. Like I have been dormant, dominated by skulls and bones my whole life. But now I hear a message of freedom where people will learn to accept who I am and I can learn to accept them. Respectful of their constitutional liberties and fundamental rights. In the light of the US Constitution, ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. It is the context of the document's executive summary. I can imagine that the freemasons on board at the time would not have realized they would succeed in the end to destroy the very document they loved. Yet their is treachery at the top of that pyramid.

Ezekiel 37, Samuel 8

These bible passages describe what the CFR candidates have put before us today on the CFR media. We have rejected the LORD. Look at Huckabee, he is straight out of Samuel 8. He is an evangelical. He has created HIS OWN religion to get what he wants. We reject kings. We want the lamb that is Ron Paul.

PS: Although I am not religious, I know these facts because I ACCEPT my brothers and sisters.

Peace,

Diogenes of Sinope

"...libertarian turned Republican Rep. Ron Paul "

RON PAUL HAS ALWAYS BEEN A REPUBLICAN!

He ran as a Libertarian in 1987, he has spent the other 71 years of his life as a Republican. Elected to congress 10 times AS A REPUBLICAN.

The only difference between ignorance and lies is intent. Either way, please get you facts/ethics straight before you try to influence others.


(He's always been a Republican except when he wasn't, when he changed to the Libertarian Party in 1988 to run for president as its candidate.)

Malcolm - thanks for doing your part to start countering the obvious media bias against Paul. This is the type of coverage FNC or another outlet might give if they weren't hell bent on destroying Paul's campaign even if it means turning a blind eye to the DEVALUATION OF OUR DOLLAR and an economic collapse.

It is striking, frightening, and surreal to watch Ron Paul's campaign stand utterly alone in addressing the root of our economic woes. In the debates during the Dr.'s economic policy lessons, the other GOP candidates typically have a look on their face that is a mixture of contempt and brazen idiocy... kind of like bigotry against a person from a foreign land that speaks a language they do not understand.

The other GOP candidates are clueless, and the financial "experts" that dismiss Paul do so without any substantive disagreement at all (unless, of course, you consider ad hominem attacks substantive)... and this kind of madness has been mainstream. But perhaps, with the Lion of economic collapse roaring outside our door, America might finally get a chance to hear from the Doctor.

Maybe you just haven't been following Ron Paul's campaign. Ron Paul has attended every debate ready to talk about real issues. Like a true foreign policy change for our Nation, a peaceful foreign policy, essentially the foreign policy of Thomas Jefferson. Yes, Thomas Jefferson's foreign policy, peace and friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none. A sane foreign policy, as opposed to an insane one where we think we can do whatever we want in the world and there will be no consequences.

Ron Paul, showing up at the debate to talk about true economic reform, fixing the dollar to stop these wild gyrations in our economy caused by the quasi-private-government Federal Reserve playing around with our money, stealing it's value right out of our bank accounts, causing inflation that slowly converts everyone's property back into taxable income. No real profit, but income tax to pay for the inflation, income tax to be paid because the dollar is worth less. Oil is the same price that it has always been, it's the dollar that is worth less.

And Rudy Giuliani, acting like the Court Jester, a Clown, giggling while Ron Paul debates real issues. Giuliani showing no respect to Dr. Ron Paul, acting like he is some sort of Fox News Laugh Track. If you and Giuliani think it appropriate for Giuliani to act like a child or some sort of court jester towards Dr. Ron Paul during these debates with no consequence, you are mistaken.

It's simply some of the younger Ron Paul supporters showing Rudy Giuliani the same respect that Giuliani showed Dr. Ron Paul during the debates. It may not be right, but it is certainly understandable. It's sad that Giuliani and a very few of Ron Paul's younger supporters detract from the real issues in this Presidential Election, but even worst is the lack of coverage of Ron Paul and the real issues he brings froward to the debates.

I am preemptively posting this to the inevitable posts of some liberals who will claim that abortion is a privacy issue and thus Ron Paul is somehow against privacy.

The abortion issue is a life/death issue, not a privacy issue. I do not have the right to kill my child in the privacy of my home, in the name of privacy. You could argue that the fetus is not alive, well that is a state issue to decide. According to the Constitution, states decide most all life and death issues such as when life begins and when life ends (when a coma patient is legally dead, euthanasia, etc.)

Basically a libertarian believes you are free to do anything in the world you want to do as long as you are not harming another person or their property. Killing a baby is harming. Or at least it is up to each state to decide when a baby’s life legally begins.

In any case, there’s no way a democratic congress would ever ratify any judge who would overturn Roe v. Wade. So abortion issue is a non-issue anyway.

Still it is interesting that Jane Roe who initiated the Federal interference in the abortion issue has turned around and is supporting Ron Paul who wants to remove abortion from the Federal Government.

Whatever you think of Ron Paul... He is absolutely the most interesting presidential candidate in the race. Although you wouldn’t know it from the MSM.

Ron Paul tops other candidates
- 4th quarter fundraising (at least for republicans)
- Fundraising records (6 million in one day)
- Volunteers (over 100,000 registered)
- GOP Straw poll wins
- Debate wins
- YouTube videos
- Online poll wins
- Web traffic (Google, etc.)
- Rally attendances
- Largest Blimp in America
- etc.

Yet media blackout over past year - strange.

For example, Time magazine has only mentioned Ron Paul 3 times in the past year (plus a little two page dismissive article). Time magazine even had a GOP cover story last month with several articles on all Republican candidates (except Ron Paul). They did not mention Ron Paul once in the whole magazine. Very strange. This is just one of many examples.

Still the Ron Paul revolution will continue regardless of what happens in the election. Americans are waking up and the internet provides a level playing field for truth to rise to the surface so we can start to elect representatives to Washington who will actually follow the Constitution for a change.

Thank you Andrew Malcolm for providing some of the best Ron Paul coverage in America. Too bad you're not running Time Warner AOL.

Great article. Ron Paul is gaining momentum!

If you want your future articles about Ron Paul to be seen by even more Ron Paul supporters and others following the Ron Paul movement you yourself can easily post a link to your articles at www.WhatTheySayAboutRonPaul.com.

What interests me is, of all current candidates, this fragile alliance between pro-life and pro-choice is only possible under Dr. Paul. It speaks to his credit, and an ability to unite our nation.

In my line of work, I've noticed any law or system set up in opposition to freedom of choice, is unenforceable. By way of example, I would submit drug and alcohol prohibitions, or various sodomy laws promulgated at times throughout our nation's history. Realistically, in an era of travel, internet access and FedEx, freedom of reproductive choice will flourish, irrespective of legality.

I am pro-choice and pro-Paul.

I don't get the opening statement ("What a coincidence!"). Of course this endorsement was timed with the 35th anniversary of Roe v Wade. When press coverage is sorely lacking, the campaign has to practically make sure that the stars are aligned, the endorsements are significant, and a money bomb has been recently delivered in order to get even a brief mention in the news. And even then they only get it in the LA Times' blog (with subtle and not so subtle smugness and condescension), rather than on the front page.

Thank you to the L.A. Times for presenting fair news stories about Dr. Paul.

I can't say that the shouting contest was in the best taste, but I can sympathize with the Ron Paul supporters at that news conference. Dr. Paul has consistently out performed Rudy Giuliani in everything except media attention. There are grassroots supporters everywhere trying to get the word out about Dr. No, and having most of the newsies just ignore the importance of the message, or scoff at it gets old after awhile. Add to this instance the fact that Rudy is pretty much the anti-thesis of Dr. Paul in many of his issues and I'm sure it doesn't take much to spark this type of thing.

Although incidents like that one get brought up a lot, most of the time supporters of Congressman Paul are just quietly trying to get a little bit of that free media support that all the other candidates are getting freely. The Ron Paul Revolution is not a bunch of whacko's, we are not a bunch of "young people", we are not a bunch of anti-war hippies, we are not any one group. The only thing that can truly be said about the Ron Paul volunteers is that they are passionate, and they are proud to have the first candidate in a long time that has a real message, and supports everything that made America great in the first place.

"libertarian turned Republican Rep. Ron Paul"

Nice twist. He's always been a Republican but ran for President in 88 as a Libertarian.

You want to try and paint Paul SUPPORTERS as miscreants and rude, fine and we look at you in the same light.

So far, it looks like Giuliani is the loooong shot.


(I don't have to paint such behavior as rude. Most people can make their own judgment on that. And will.)

America WILL be taken back, with or without your help.

Thank you so much for your coverage of Dr. Ron Paul. It has been scarce in the mainstream media these days, despite the things you mention in this article.

It is almost cliche now-a-days as a GOP candidate to claim you are the only conservative in the race, and that you are the most consistent. But when you look at their records, you can easily see that it's a farce at best.

With Ron Paul, you can look back and you can see that is who he says he is. He ran on the EXACT same platform 20 years ago.

I PROUDLY support Ron Paul for President.

Andrew,
Thank you again for the coverage. I think it's fantastic that you interact with your bloggers. Win or lose, I think Ron Paul will be remembered as refining Internet campaigning. I don't necessarily consider the lack of media coverage as sinister or conspiratorial as much as perhaps a bit of over-reliance on the polls and the assumptions about pubic opinion that go with it. From there, the imbalance of coverage tends to be self-perpetuating.
Thanks again for the news and analysis!


(You bet, Darryl. Thanks for reading and taking the time to leave a comment. Appreciate you and others coming back.)

I am pro_choice and support Ron Paul. The federal government needs to butt out of this topic and leave it to the States where it belongs.

Grizzle you da' man! I laughed my butt off when I read your comments. And a huge thanks to Andrew Malcolm for having the courage to report on Ron Paul in a fair and balanced way.

As a strict Constitutionalist, Dr. Paul would agree that "We hold these truths to be self-evident. That we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights..That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The right to life is not given by government, and can't be taken away by government, nor even by one's own mother! It is "inalienable"!

I am pro choice and pro Paul.

I don't understand this love-hate Ron Paul obsession of yours, all I know is that is giving the supporters a platform to support Ron Paul and inform those who read what you write about what he is really like. For that I thank you.

So what if Ron Paul is pro-life? He has stated that his position will have no effect if he is president, because he will leave that to the states.
That is like creating a hysteria because he has certain food preferences, oh no! he will outlaw eggplants...not.

I'm glad pro-life demonstrators joined the protesting of Guilliani, how sad when there are more Ron Paul supporters than Guilliani's around the supposedly "front runner...mphfff".

Ron Paul all the way!
2008


(Maybe I can help a little. I've never loved Ron Paul. I've never hated Ron Paul. Or any candidate. I tell stories about politics. Sometimes the candidate's supporters like them. Sometimes they don't. Thats the way it is. Right now on another item here some John Edwards supporters are angry and think I hate him because I wrote about his pretty hair after David Letterman on national TV mussed it up. That's the way it is in the blog business. We try to be equal opportunity offenders. So thanks for reading. It'll be interesting to see how RP does here in coming days.)

Andrew, at least it was Ron Paul "supporters" shouting down Rudy. In recent and past debates it was RUDY HIMSELF heard cackling in the background when Fox and other "moderators" were taking potshots at Ron with their pseudo-questioning.

Rudy, this is what Ron was trying to explain to you with the term "Blowback." See NOW how it works?

(How it works? So Dr. Paul is for the status quo? We're just going to keep yelling at each other during and after the revolution? Wow, how exciting is that to contemplate. I thought he was a change agent. Thanks for the insight. Or maybe you're just trying to justify such behavior, which I haven't seen Dr. Paul do during the debates. He seems so steady there without shouting.)

Andrew,
I consistently read your blog in edition to other major news sites. I think you have given Ron Paul the most even press coverage of anyone working for a legitimate media outlet, and I appreciate it.


(And we appreciate your coming back and joining the dialogue.)

As a Republican, we have to set aside our starched shirts and our properness. I think RP supporters may have been rude, but if I would have been there, I would have joined in. Rudy giggles and mocks Paul on National TV debates! Exceuse me, we are going to fight back and to hell with our manners. Our Republic is at stake.

Andrew, has anyone ever told you you look like Gepetto? Thanks for the exposure for Ron Paul.

Hi Andrew. I'm the 6 ft 220 pounder hetero (member?). You truly are a breath of fresh air. I'm glad you take pains to be impartial and look at things objectively. Ron (and Edwards to a lesser extent) are putting the message out and that is heroic. We desperately need people that sacrifice their time and livelihood to address the dire straits we find ourselves in. I don't want to read later after the elections about how journalist were just doing their jobs (and kowtow to their corporate deities). Everyone thinks Ft. Sumter was the start of the "Civil" War, but it was in Godfrey Illinois where Elijah Paris Lovejoy fought for freedom of speech (through honest journalism) where the first shot was vollied. Great job Mr. Malcolm, and God bless.


(Thank you. Good to hear from you again. Appreciate your return.)

Thank you Andrew and the L.A. Times for your unbiased coverage of a very interesting story.

Thanks again, Andrew!

I will tell you why we Paul supporters are so vehement; it's not entirely one-sided. Let me tell you a little story...

At the straw poll in New York City hosted by the Manhattan "Young" Republicans Club, we showed up, as usual, en masse and cast our votes for Dr. Paul after a spirited, yet civil debate session with representatives from all the candidates' parties. Imagine how things turned sour when Rudy's people discovered that we beat him - in Manhattan! Fast forward to the bar across the street, where we Paul supporters showed up, as usual, en masse to celebrate our symbolic victory. Apparently, some Giuliani supporters were there as well to drown their sorrows and ponder just what force of the universe could exist that would motivate Republicans to show up at a Republican event and vote for someone other than Don Giuliani. As I approached a couple at the bar to simply make polite conversation (thinking that this is what people of a like-minded political philosophy do), I was physically attacked by the woman, who had obviously had too much to drink, and she ripped the "Ron Paul" sticker I was wearing off my chest. Good thing it wasn't a button! Her long fingernails facilitated her actually drawing blood, and she was ushered out by her companion who, after making excuses for her drunkenness, told me that we should "just do everyone a favor and go away."

I could have made a big deal about this, but figured that karma would vindicate us eventually. I have to say, more and more it looks like I was right to do so. It didn't surprise me, then, to read about Bernie Kerik and John Deady, the former co-chair of Veterans for Rudy who told The Guardian that we should pursue ALL Muslims until "we defeat them or chase them back to their caves, or, in other words, get rid of them.”

So if you see an interview or press conference with Rudy, of which there are far too many given the proportion of his abject failure in the early primaries, have a bit of understanding for the Paul supporters waving signs in the background who are championing a campaign that is based on something other than cronyism, bigotry, and arrogance.

Andrew Malcolm, another balanced report! How refreshing!!

This is still America and the truth has a chance -- despite the neo-con owned mainstream media effort to squash the Ron Paul message a liberty, responsibility and justice for all.

The MSM would rather be cheerleaders for the now-documented neo-con / Bush lies. But watch out -- pro-neo-con Sam Zell leverage-bought your $8B company with just $315M of his own money last month. Now he gets to decide editorial tone. He loves Charles Krauthammer -- one of the lead neo-con architects of the lie-based Iraq war.

Let's return America to truth, decency, responsible government and the higher moral ground. Ron Paul 2008!

Sometimes you have to shout to be heard.

If the MSM have a shut-out of Dr Paul going on, are we supposed to just like back and think of England, as the r3V0Lution gets cut down? NO WAY!! This genie is out of the bottle. The horse has bolted. The cat's out of the bag. This r3V0Lution will proceed, regardless of the MSM. And we will remember who stands in the way of liberty, and who helps.


(Yeh, right. That's a rationalization for thuggish behavior that Dr. Paul would not likely condone, despite his own frustrations.)

Support Ron Paul NOW - Before it's too late.

With a fractured Republican primary and the so-called "front-runners" running out of money and free media exposure fast (i.e. Huckabee, McCain, and Guiliani), it is looking more and more like Ron Paul is the genuine front-runner. I say this because he gets more donors that any presidential candidate, which means that he has more real support because his support is coming from real peopl rather than a small minority of support from rich folks with deep pockets.

It will most likely come down to Mitt (which can finance his own campaign because he is a multi-millionaire) and Dr. Ron Paul (who is getting his money from we the people). We need a statesman, and that man is Dr. Ron Paul!

With a fractured Republican primary and the so-called "front-runners" running out of money and free media exposure fast (i.e. Huckabee, McCain, and Guiliani), it is looking more and more like Ron Paul is the genuine front-runner. I say this because he gets more donors that any presidential candidate, which means that he has more real support because his support is coming from real peopl rather than a small minority of support from rich folks with deep pockets.

It will most likely come down to Mitt (which can finance his own campaign because he is a multi-millionaire) and Dr. Ron Paul (who is getting his money from we the people). We need a statesman, and that man is Dr. Ron Paul!

Andrew, what's RUDE is the way Guiliani cackles everytime Ron Paul tries to make a point during the debates....watch any YouTube video and his "laugh" stands out in each one. I think when his supporters show up at Rudy's speeches, it's a kind of "blowback" if you know what I mean:)...when the entire media machine declares a "Blackout" on Ron Paul, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT HIS SUPPORTERS TO DO?????

Giggliani has no class or is on drugs . Why must he laugh at every serious issue? as for Roe, well take that you so called conservitive christians ...aka huckabee and romnoodle

Thanks for your continuing coverage of Ron Paul.

I think it's way past time to stop calling him a "long shot", though. Was the term "long shot" ever applied to any of the following candidates, none of whom lasted as long as Ron Paul?

Jim Gilmore
Tommy Thompson
Sam Brownback
John Cox
Alan Keyes
Tom Tancredo
Duncan Hunter
Fred Thompson

Ron Paul has outlasted all of the above, and has more money and grassroots volunteers than just about everyone else who is left. Yet none of them were ever called "the longest of long shots" or said to be pursuing a "quixotic" campaign, or inaccurately said to be "dead last" in the polls, when they were in fact in the middle of the pack.

It makes you wonder why the media can't just report the facts, and leave out their mistaken preconceived ideas about who is "viable" and who isn't. Obviously, their track record leaves a lot to be desired.

There is no greater emotional topic as the pro-life, and in the realm of Republicans, Catholics, Guiliani is a complete sham. Guiliani is completely unelectable as a Republican as president with a pro-abortion view, period. Besides supporting Ron Paul is simply being Ron Paul, backing hhis views, true Republicans need to take a look at the polls (which seems endless) regarding how Americans view the war on Iraq (75% against, regardless of political party) and their concern over the economy. Ron Paul is the only TRUE electable Republican for President of the US in 2008. He's raised millions as a hopeful, imagine how much he'll raise as THE candidate.

I just wanted to point out that the Jane Roe gal being celebrated in this article is someone who changed her mind on an issue -- flip-flopped as many now prefer to say.

Now, I am certainly not oppossed to anyone thinking about an issue and changing their views. In fact, thinking people and those who progress morally (as oppossed to those who stagnate) generally change their views on abortion twice in their lives.

I would like to see more acknowledgement of this fact in the electorate, who like to retain the privilege of changing their minds for themselves, yet are outraged when a public figure changes his stance on an issue.

look guys i want ron paul to win too,but coming off like obnoxious jerks isnt going to get him any more votes.they shouldnt go around shouting down people trying to talk.people see that and say well if his supporters are that obnoxious and annoying,well then whats their candidate like?

if you havent noticed ron paul currently doesnt have enough support.he needs all the support he can get.just because his support group is hardcore,doesnt mean he'll win anything,each person only gets one vote.the campaign needs to appeal to as many people as possible,and not alienate people.

actions like those at the giuliani news conference does not help ron paul,in fact its hurtful to his campaign

Ron Paul has always been a Republican he ran as a libertarian once he realized Bush Sr. would destroy the Reagan Coalition... Classical liberalism and fiscal responsibility are not incorporated in the neo-conservative manifesto sadly their omission will eventually destroy the Grand Old Party and leave many voters without a voice.

Andrew, it seems that in your election coverage for the LA Times, you try to include Ron Paul , which is great, and appreciated.
From my perspective, and not everybody may agree with me, you try very hard to be "balanced", although, I would say that it's obvious that you are having a hard time, because the LA Times, of course, will have a candidate that they support. So any media coverage has to favor that candidate.
I see every other article you write with some of the stereotypical namecalling or biased labels for Ron Paul.
Please try to portray all sides of Ron Paul followers, why not mention the sacrifices they make to help out in this campaign, because they are sick of the status quo government, and the other candidates from the power establishment, and want fundamental changes that will improve the economy, foreign policy and restore our civil liberties. No other candidates have that kind of followers because they only have Big Corporate contributors that can afford to repeat to advertise their favorite candidates. Ron Paul is different, totally ignored by the media because he hasn't been bough out by the corporations, that's the big difference. He's for the people and the constitution. For Freedom!


(We appreciate your visiting the site and perhaps it's too much to expect anyone to read the dozens of items that habe mentioned Dr. Paul. But the subject of his supporters' dedication and sacrifice has been covered in the blog, and in fact, in the news pages as well. Thanks for visiting our blog. Hope to see you back soon.)

I've never read this column before my interest in Ron Paul which just began about 2 months ago and since then, I've read several. I appreciate the balanced view for the most part but the phrase "libertarian turned Republican " really is misleading. That implies that more of a libertarian party relationship than is true. Since he was a republican before and after his one year as a libertarian, you could have put "one time libertarian" or you could have put "republican turned libertarian-for-a-year turned republican" or.... just something more accurate and less misleading than "libertarian turned republican".

A healthy new vine is often seen growing in the rubbish and manure of falsehoods. Ron Paul is just such a healthy new vine. His words are the truth and will grow like a new vine.

I'm enjoying reading your blog more and more. But get your editors to get Ron Paul on the front page of the paper; it's the American thing to do.


(I thought we didn't care about the old dying msm?)

And then I woke up, there it is; The Beautiful Land of the Freethinkers AMERICA. The land of (law and order) with good intentions from the founders. I vividly saw this compassionate man (a messenger) getting humble advices from the founders on how lead (the people of the free) and to be a patriot as a natural American. That day is now, that day is here! be proud America, a good doctor in the house...

And then I woke up, there it is; The Beautiful Land of the Freethinkers AMERICA. The land of (law and order) with good intentions from the founders. I vividly saw this compassionate man (a messenger) getting humble advices from the founders on how lead (the people of the free) and to be a patriot as a natural American. That day is now, that day is here! be proud America, a good doctor in the house...

Thanks Andrew, yet another topic that should warrant more attention.

That the center figure in the 35-year-old case has now decided to endorse the pro-life Dr. Paul is nothing short of facinating. I was floored.

You would expect to see this story on Yahoo or CCN, but alas there is another dead actor to obsess over.


(Ah, yes, well the American public has never been criticized for focusing too intently on serious issues.)

thanks again, andrew for the fair coverage. i'm looking forward to much more, as dr paul gains momentum.

the colaspe of the doller and the usa economy is the feds fault for printing the money out of thin air, the congreses fault for spending the money printed out of thin air, the egsecutive branch and the dick chainny branch for going to unesesary war that we cant afford, and the legislative branch for not inforcing the suprem law of the land THE CONSTITUTION! you though you all new better than our founding fathers DIDENT YOU? 9.3 trillion in debt, 3 trillion for the iraq war with future canidates talking about the importance of nation building and going to war with iran the #3 oil producer in the world. it doesent look good with only one canidate talking about the root of the problem the imballance in our government.

I am glad to see coverage for Ron Paul. The only candidate that seems to want the power where it belongs. Power belongs to the People not whoever owns the USA right now.

I shutter to think what will happen if he don't win. The people are tired of the rich war mongers standing on our backs. The people I know that are for Ron Paul are intelligent, and aware, many of them are Christians too they just don't wear it on their sleeves and we are disillusioned by the government and where it has taken us. I think there is a chance a lot more people feel this way than might be expected. Let this dark horse ride to the front.

Listening to Ron Paul is like listening to the truth for the first time. As far as listening to the government goes it might actually be the first time any of us have heard the truth from a politician.

Thanks Andrew and LA Times for having some integrity.

Lookup CFR sheeple.

Andrew,
you're winning my love and affection more and more each day!

And I'm not even gay!


Peter


(Thanks, Peter. You're a pal. I appreciate your return trips here.)

 
1 2 | »

Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics


Categories


Archives
 



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: