Ron Paul to Phil Gramm: no way, no how, no John McCain

Texan to Texan, as one fellow who famously switched parties in his political career to another, Phil Gramm took one last shot this week at bringing Ron Paul into the John McCain fold. (See video below.)

Gramm not only failed, but Paul blew the whistle on him today as he castigated the choices offered voters by the two major-party presidential nominees and lent the cache he gained from his own White House bid to various third-party alternatives.

Paul held forth, as had been advertised, at a news conference in Washington where he was joined by independent (and perennial) presidential candidate Ralph Nader, Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin.

Missing from the show was Bob Barr who, true to the spirit of the Libertarian Party that tapped him as it nominee, decided at the last minute to skip the group gathering and hold his own news conference.

In his remarks, Paul revealed that a McCain representative, who he did not name, had called him as part of what has been a recent effort to score an endorsement.

Later, Paul told The Times' Janet Hook the go-between was Gramm, a former Democrat who signed up with the GOP in the early 1980s.

In explaining why he rejected the overture, Paul -- perhaps underestimating the size of his following these days -- said: "I don't like the idea of getting 2 or 3 million people angry at me. ... I said absolutely no. It might diminish my credibility."

Paul, a Republican turned Libertarian White House candidate in 1988 turned Republican again, said Gramm pitched McCain as the potential president who would do "less harm'' than Democrat Barack Obama (not exactly stirring words).

In urging a vote against the "establishment candidates," Paul said, "There's no doubt in my mind that we [supporters of third-party contenders] represent the majority."

Obama allies quickly jumped at the news of Gramm's contact with Paul. Damien LaVera of the Democratic National Committee fired off an e-mail saying it offered "further evidence" that Gramm "is back in the good graces of the McCain campaign."

He ostensibly had been banished from the inner circle after some ill-chosen words earlier this summer (such as saying the U.S. had become "a nation of whiners").

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[Jim Brown]

Kick out the Dems and Repubs and get back to the Constitution...NOW!

[spinnikerca]

PHIL GRAMM?

They had PHIL GRAMM contact him? Oh, doubtless because their views on the economy are 'SO CLOSE' to eachother, hmmmm?

I did hear the part of the conference where Ron Paul said the McCain campaign had for the first time directly gotten in touch with him - and asked for his endorsement. The audiance burst out laughing. I wonder how much chance McCain's campaign gave of this working? Or was it supposed to be some hint that Ron might enjoy 'access' to the secretary of the treasury if McCain won?

Whatever. I'm voting third party for President. Either for a candidate who showed up, or one who wasn't lucky enough to get an invite, to begin with.

[PainfullyAware]

Thank Goodness For Ron Paul.

A Voice Of Reason In Troubled Times.

[tony]

To all Ron Paul supporters: The republican party swift boated Ron during the primaries and Mccain publicly poke fun and dismished Ron during the debates. Its time for a payback. If you disagree on anything else the one fundamental thing Ron believes is Iraq war was a mistake in agreement with Obama. Let us all stand up and vote Obama sending a msg to Republicans.

[Anon]

VERY, VERY IMPORTANR LINKS

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

[kritarchist]

Back in the good graces of McCain? More likely, trying to get back. If he had succeeded in getting the Ron Paul endorsement, he would have been warmly welcomed back.

[Harry Baulls]

Ron Paul for Obama. That would be great. Seeing as the man knows what he is talking about, I know if he really thought about it, he would say that under McCain things would get worse, under Obama things would get better (albeit not in the ideal direction that Paul wants).

[Ed Weirdness]

Given Dr. Paul's views that neither candidate is representative of the views, values and interests of America's Citizens, it seems contradictory and self serving for him to publicly raise this issue. Given the hipocratic oath to "first, do no harm", Dr. Pauls choice to use this press conference to provide fodder for the media and the Obamanation to rain down accusations against the only other viable candidate seems petulent and short sighted. As a Ron Paul supporter and contributor, I am disappointed by Ron's decision to air this dirty laundry. It acheive's no possible good outcome for America's Citizens, and only makes the final days of campaiging more combative and confusing. I question, after this show of childish "one upmanship" whether Dr. Paul would have been the right choice as president. Regardless of how Dr. Paul and the other "thrid party" candidates characterize their actions, it will not make any of them competitive, and it only belittles the nacent third party movement! I had expected, at least hoped, for better than this from Congressman Paul. I'll support the Republican candidate, albeit grudgingly, come November.

[Mike]

HA!! I LOVE IT! Don Frederick tells it the way it is.
America is in a flaming tailspin and Gramm wants us to vote for McCrazy because he will do the "Least Harm" to the country. What an idiot.

What a shame that the sheeple of America, and a media owned by the CFR, pay more attention to Ron Paul AFER he is out of the running for president.

Vote for one of the two "Darlings" and it's a vote for the final episode of the USA.

[Daniel Lineberry]

Dr. Paul is correct, but so is Phil Gramm. Dr. Paul would be the single best candidate I have ever known. McCain is certainly not addressing the divergence from the constitution we have experienced, but he also is not representing the direction of Senator Obama: Socialism. My vote will got to Senator McCain because he does represent less damage to our country than Senator Obama, and Bob Barr simply cannot win.
I really wish that all the people that feel that increasing taxes for companies and wealthy investors will help our economy would observe the case studies in Europe, like France. Or at lease take basic economics.

[Anonymous]

At Bob Barr's separate press conference he announced that he had, with his running mate's approval, asked Ron Paul to join his ticket as candidate for Vice President.

This is something Paul supporters have been begging Barr to do for quite some time.

[mediahack]

Why a Ron Paul story all of a sudden?
There it is out of the blue, a Ron Paul story.Why?
Oh wait a minute, Ron Paul is against John McCain.
That's why!

[dannyboytuyu]

Why isn't the press and democratic party talking about the scummy influence that Karl Rove, the "rasputin" of the bush regime is having on the mccain campaign; just another example of "mcsamism".

[gabe]

LOL whatever ED Weirdness. you were always a mccain supporter. I see these posts all the time. "i was a supporter of so and so but then they said something that i dont agree with so i flip flop 180 degrees the other way now im voting for so and so" paaaaalease.

[Michael]

"Why a Ron Paul story all of a sudden?
There it is out of the blue, a Ron Paul story.Why?
Oh wait a minute, Ron Paul is against John McCain.
That's why!"

Go ahead and put on your blinders then. Gee, maybe its the facts? I know you would rather be out there sweating the "pig-gate" nonsense anyway.

Get a clue!

[Jake in Salt Lake]

Ed Weirdness wrote: "I'll support the Republican candidate, albeit grudgingly, come November."

I view this as throwing your vote away. There really is not much difference between McCain and Obama at this point. McCain and Obama both saber-rattle against Iran and Russia, the difference being that Obama pays lip service the anti-war left and McCain relishes in arousing the radical, hawkish right. But when it comes right down to it both are very interventionist and believe in flexing our military's might. Both McCain and Obama support big government and by extension inflation. Both McCain and Obama have similar stances on the environment. There is very little real difference between the platforms of the major two candidates. There might be slight, superficial differences but both candidates are one in the same and are simply trying to sell a more convincing personal story or market their brand better (i.e. Maverick who works across the aisle vs. change that is not associated with the last 8 years of Bush)

Remember, elections are not horse races where the goal is to pick the winner so that you can brag to your friends about how you were right. Elections are where you can vote your conscience. If anyone votes for either McCain or Obama when they know that there is a better candidate out there (Barr, Baldwin, Nader, McKinney), then they are the ones who have thrown away their vote.

[WhereIsTheFood]

Great to see Ron Paul sticking to his beliefs

[Bewildered]

Why would anyone vote for a third party in this election? Don't you know you are giving your votes to someone and it's not the one you voted for. Think with your head and not your heart. Vote the lesser of two evils please- not for someone who can't possibly win.

[James]

Hey Ron, I love ya, but don't be a tool. If your running for office would make it more likely for McCain to win, then it's on you pal. Why don't you quit being a republican, and foster the 3 party system after this election. Help overturn the Patriot act, you can do more good as an active, citizen advocate member of gov, not an egotistical, I gotta run for pres even though I know I don't stand a chance in hell of winning Nader wannabe. If you wait until after this election, run against 4 more years of status quo (boot the gop out of office!) I swear I'll vote for you next time.

[WILLIAM]

Ron Paul is a man of principle, says what he means.

[SayNO2008.com]

Say NO to McBama!

Say NO to Republicrats!

Say NO to Establishment media outlets!

Say NO to bipartisan trashing of the Constitution!

Cast a protest vote for a 3rd party presidential candidate of your choice.

Tell everyone why you will vote against the lesser of two evils.

Tell everyone who you will vote for.

Tell everyone what you think.

Be heard: http://SayNO2008.com

"The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two party system... This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment, principled candidates." - Ron Paul

[Craig]

If the McCain campaign had wanted Ron Paul supporters to back their man over Obama (or a third party candidate), perhaps they should have treated them a little more respectfully at the Republican national convention, and throughout the primaries.

I doubt Ron Paul would have endorsed McCain under any conditions, but many Ron Paul voters were disgusted with the reception they received from their fellow Republicans, spying on them, intimidating them, trying to unseat delegates legitimately earned, and generally trying to pretend that McCain was the unanimous choice of Republicans when he was not.

[Al]

@Bewildered:

I think John Quincy Adams said it best:
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

[Craig]

"Why would anyone vote for a third party in this election? Don't you know you are giving your votes to someone and it's not the one you voted for."

Actually, every time I vote for a third party candidate, my vote goes to exactly the one I voted for. My vote for Bob Barr in November won't be given to McCain or Obama, because neither one has earned it, and I don't want either one to be president, and I don't want to add my vote to the number of votes supporting either of them.

Is that so hard to figure out?

[John Dudley]

I find it strange that Ron Paul's comments are now getting wide spread press coverage. I am a Paul supporter myself ($2300) and find it strange that the previously invisible Paul is now getting noticed by our neocon infested media.

The only candidate who will suffer from this sort of endorsement is Obama. The rank and file Republicans will never support any of the third party candidates including Barr.

A vote for a third party candidates is therefore simply a vote for McCain and a war on Iran.. The media knows this and that is the reason Paul is only now getting all of this very belated belated coverage.