Hey, Ron Paul Republicans!?! It's Time For A GOP Palace Coup!

With all the party and media babble about who is better equipped to take over the Republican party in the wake of the bloodbath of the '08 election, it's impressive how deeply the pundits have been able to repress the memory of the Ron Paul campaign.

After all, compare the Ron Paul 'Revolution' campaign with Barack Obama's now acknowledged electoral genius. That stuff Republicans are now realizing they have to do in the future? Paul did it months ago. Excited new voters beyond the base? Check. Raised massive amounts of money from small donations online? Ditto. Legions of creative people generating their own campaign content on YouTube and beyond? Did it. Young voters? Had those.

The biggest problem for Ron Paul and his supporters is the turd-in-the-punchbowl way they were treated by the Republicans. Remember Rudy's snide confusion over the idea that the United State's foreign policy may have somehow have been a factor in why the U.S. was attacked on 9/11? Recall the debate shunning?

But look how things have changed. McCain's psuedo-maverick-ism tore the Republicans a gaping new one after they collectively rejected Ron Paul; the only candidate with ideas for real, actual change...such as ending the Iraq War.

The beauty of the current GOP anarchy is that it may present the perfect chance for the anarachists to take over the establishment. Or the anarcho-capitalists or limited government small L libertarians and or whatever y'all can agree on. (And good luck on that -- agreement isn't what libertarians do well.)

The party is ripe for the taking. Ripe, I say!

It's weeks past the election. Everyone should have sobered up by now. The fact that there is a significant chunk of Republicans that are still crushing on Sarah Palin shows that it's time show the same mercy for the Grand Old Party that The Chief showed to Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest -- any sense of rational thought is gone, so pull out the pillow and start smothering until the kicking stops.

Now here's a tougher question. Do you want the Republican Party? It's got high name recognition and if the two logo choices are the elephant or the donkey, I think the elephant wins. Sure, you don't want most of the people left behind after the Obama rapture devastated Karl Rove's dream of a Permanent Republican Majority and sent anyone with a bow tie, an IQ of over 100 and a dog earned copy of Atlas Shrugged floating off to conservative Valhalla. The ragtag band of people that remain in the blue hats mainly agree that gays shouldn't marry and that straights can't have abortions and that the unmarried gays shouldn't adopt the babies that the non-aborting straights have.

The appeal of Ron Paul was his ideas, not his lovable ole' funeral director looks. So it's time for someone to grab those ideas, grab the organizational skill of herding a bunch of individualists and grab control of the damn Republican party right now... before I have to listen to Mike Huckabee's jokes, Mitt Romney's dumb advice or Sarah Palin's effin' voice for the next four years.

Follow Lee Stranahan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Stranahan

Comments

[burndtdan]

i'd love for them to take over, but a lot of them need to learn to work with the other side a bit more. it doesn't help anyone if they walk into every decision assuming they are right an anyone with any other idea is just an idiot.

[Pdubya]

you comment shows you are not involved with the movement, at all. Freedom is Popular. And it shows in the R3VOLution. There are progressives, anarchists, true conservatives, anti-war hippies, real christians, atheists, all sorts, all colors, all ages. Naomi Wolf is very involved in the message, and has spoken at RP events...recently interviewing with Lew Rockwell.

so....your ad-hominem isn't only empty, but inaccurate. come check out www.campaignforliberty.com or www.dailypaul.com or www.wearechange.com lots of stuff going on and a very diverse populace!

[Pyrum]

Pdubya, I'm usually on board with everything you have to say, but I think burntdan makes a good point. I'll give you it's not "a lot of them," but our local group had some trouble with our members who had an "it's us against them" attitude. They would attend republican meetings and become argumentative and combative with the mainstream republicans over minor issues, which turned people off and didn't help our cause. Fortunately for us, they're the members who are the least interested in remaining active in the republican party.

[Peter007]

There are two aspects to politics.. One is policy and the other is personality. The Libertarians are freaky policy geeks. They suck at the personality aspect. Obama has a wonderful personality. Who knows what his policy's will be. He won the election.

[ElBruce]

Wow, I totally forgot about those guys. Yeah, the REVO crowd should totally take over.

The best way to do this would be to put Paul in charge of the RNC. He's too old to make it as candidate again by now, but he could follow the Dean route of putting his innovations in practice throughout the party's mechanisms and then launch a candidate who follows those methods and hopefully* improves on them.

* If you're a Republican. I hope they do the opposite of all this.

[Pdubya]

normally, i'd agree on his age. but, ron paul is fit. he rides his bike 10 miles a day, always walks, and eats right...and he is a doctor and takes care of himself. i've met him several times and could only hope for his level of energy when i'm his age. fyi

[guerilla]

Paul's innovations were telling the truth, being humble, and being serious about the untouchable issues in American politics.

There are no gimmicks to Ron Paul's campaign. There is no technique or trick. Just regular good old honesty about following the Constitution and getting government out of the way of freedom.

Until the neocons are thrown out of the GOP, nothing will change. You can't be for the Constitution and liberty if you are for foreign empire, and that is the test most Republicans fail. If the Republicans actually stood for something honest, they would smoke the Dems, who have become latte liberals.

[cgri]

Throw out the Neocons out of the GOP? How about throwing out the religious fundamentalists which have all but taken over the party? You know, those people that think that the biggest issues confronting the world (and only issues) are eliminating abortion and gays.

[Skepticat]

"For every complicated problem there is a solution, simple, plausible - and wrong." HL Mencken.
There's a good reason that libertarians only get 3-5% of the popular vote. Most people know better.

[Peter007]

Humm, your analysis seems to be simple and plausible.... Humm..

[happinessisnowhere]

95% of the American voters do not know what the Federal Reserve is or how it works.
95% of the American voters do not know what fractional reserve banking means or what sound money is.

It's only complicated if you are trying to bore people so they go away and don't pay attention to what you're doing....its very simple, if you don't have the money for something (ie , savings, capitol) you can't buy it! The artificial booms of prosperity are great until people realize it wasn't real.

Deflation will teach those 95% of ignorant Americans a very painful lesson. If they really knew better (like you claim) they would be clamoring for leadership such as Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson & Ron Paul...END THE FED!!!

[Pdubya]

Ron Paul and his ideas transcend the false left/right paradigm most of voters cling to. The Hill isn't left/right (with a few exceptions), but a centrally geared plutocracy tied to special interests, wall street, lobby, and the federal reserve. New World Order globalists, toying with your false paradigm.

Ron Paul, Mary Kaptur, Thadeus McCotter, Dennis Kucinich, Shelby..e.­tc....thos­e are the folks bucking the establishment.....

[Pdubya]

But mark my words: we ARE well orgainized. we ARE taking over local GOP parties (see details at C4L site). And we ARE growing.

As far as MSM coverage...well thats a whole other rabbit hole that appears to be one you haven't gone down yet. MSM coverage of Paul is post-facto when they want ratings to go higher or forcibly admit he was right on the economy and monetary policy (see how many interviews he's done since the election re: the economy). NYT has a good article: Ron Paul Answers Your Questions.

Do we need a GOP. Yes. We also need third parties for further assurance that we don't completely dive off into centrist plutocracy - something we're obviously suffering from dearly right now. All one has to do is look at the votes on the Patriot Act, FISA bill, and the Bailout...

[TRex86]

Unless it goes Libertarian the GOP is kaput. No need for Statist, autocratic, imperialistic, big gov't, big spending, fiscally insane conservatism. In fact it's a logical contradiction.

[Pdubya]

agreed.

[tajitj]

Reading the anti Paul comments just shows how blind most are. Everytime they make an arguement against one of Pauls ideas they make his point. Just call him a kook, that will do.

Yes he is against the Federal Reserve, income tax, Patriot Act, the war, most of the Departments, foreign aid, NAFTA, NATO, and he explains why those things are not needed. All of those things are failing or have failed but are still in place.

When a Dem tries to explain why they are so important and needed they step all over themselves. Most do not know why these institutions are there and what good they are supposedly doing.

[Gib]

I like Ron Paul, he talks a lot of sense, and impresses me as honest. But not all Ron Paul's ideas are good ideas.

[bucfish]

Ron Paul is reason and logic. To all those that call him a "kook" glad to see you are told what to think and have been indoctrinated with what is not and never will be. Being manipulated is a easy thing. Google Edward Bernays. Have fun seeing the truth of sheep herding!!!

[Peter007]

The reason Bush was so successful for two elections was that he brought into the Republican Party the Evangelicals. They took over the party. The reason Reagan won two terms was that he brought into the party, the southern democrats. The Democratic party now has a great coalition of public employee unions, Afro-American voters and wide eyed environmentalists.
If the Republican party continues to embrace the religious right, it will solidify its position as the "Party of God" or the American Taliban Party. Moderate or left wing Republicans on the East and west coasts will melt away from the party. Rockefeller Republicans like Mayor Mike Bloomberg, Former Gov. Christie Whitman, and even Arnold the Governator will be looking for a new home. I suggest we trade the Bible belt Republicans to the Democrats for the liberal democrats that are going to be disappointed with the Obama administration. The numbers aren't even but the Bible belt Republicans are the intolerant section of the party and they are holding the party back. Cut them loose. I'm sure they will find a happy home with the conservative democrats.

[Jesster]

My biggest problem with Dems / Progressives is the tendency to be timid and cowardly.

While I'll gladly take a pass on "fire and brimstone" type politics and politicians, I would like a see some real steel and backbone in the people I choose/vote to be my advocates.

I mean it's one thing to settle for a compromise and another to be consistantly compromising or compromised...

[RobinSeattle]

Lee, SOME of Paul's ideas were valid, but the guy is a flat out kook.

He is for ignoring the crisis in Darfur.

"Paul was the only "no" vote on H.Res. 180, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 (passed House 418-1-13, awaiting action in the Senate), which would "require the identification of companies that conduct business operations in Sudan [and] prohibit United States Government contracts with such companies."

"Paul advocates withdrawing U.S. participation and funding from organizations he believes override American sovereignty, such as the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the Law of the Sea Treaty, the WTO, NATO, and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America."

He wants to do away with the Federal Reserve, the income tax and the IRS.

"Paul opposes virtually all federal interference with the market process." Now isn't that what got us to this crisis to begin with? How is he different from Ayn Rand?

He is opposed to net neutrality.

For more, read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul

[machivellianX]

"Paul opposes virtually all federal interference with the market process." Now isn't that what got us to this crisis to begin with?

Wrong, what got us into this mess was Freddie & Fannie, an obscure government agency that only begun to dip it's hand into the mortgage business in recent time, and in that amount of time they have nearly brought America down to it's knees. It was government intervention that has created the problem, not free market capitalism. Free market capitalism usually brings prices down, not up, as is the case with technology, telecom, and other such things.

Also, the FED created the the excessive credit that enabled the likes of fannie/freddie to do their dirty deed, backed by the scam of AIG who insured worthless paper. Ron Paul is not a kook, he actually cares deeply about peoples well-being. If you did your research properly you might learn a think or two.

[Steven Vasquez]

Robin,

The main issue that people fail to understand with Ron Paul is that he will not vote for any bill that violates the Constitution, the law of the land. It is incredible how easily people and the media dismiss the Constitution as old and not mendable to the times, while nothing can be further from the truth. The Constitution was specifically written to limit the power and authority of the federal government to prevent it from taking liberties, freedom, and the opportunity for prosperity from the people and the states. It was also written as a living document that clearly allowed it to adapt to the times by allowing it to change with amendments that coincided with the will of the people and states (and not just corrupt politicians). Those who state the Constitution is irrelevant or just a piece of paper like George W Bush says, are either corrupt or hypocrites who also say they are law abiding. For instance, many believe the Bill of Rights lay out specific rights to people, but if you read it (and you do have a copy as a citizen that you can refer to, right?) it actually dictates specifically everything the federal government can not do to try to take away rights, and that the rights are inalienable and not limited to what's listed, as all other rights are limited to the people and the states.

[Yermammy]

Thank you Steven for attempting to explain to the ignorant. But I'm afraid most nitwits have no time for the facts. Real Liberal Democrats don't blindly follow anyone. You see the problem here, I'm sure.

[Steven Vasquez]

The more bills passed by Republicans and Democrats that violate these laws and our rights and expand the role of government, the more liberty we lose and the closer to a statist tyranny government we move to. The founding fathers were very wise, as they saw and understood how quickly an unchecked central government like we have today can lead to the loss of liberty and prosperity for its people.

That is why Ron Paul is one of the only people in Congress who actually obeys his oath to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States. We do not have the authority to be the policemen of the world. Many of the world's problems were created by the interference of the US (through the CIA, IMF, WTO, UN, or unconstitutional invasions, etc) including Bosnia, Africa, the Middle East, and South America. Most Americans do not understand these organizations, or truly understand the consequences of these organizations interfering with other countries (and our own) political and economic climates. The CIA disposes of many Democratic governments and replaces them with dictators, which leads to blowback such as overthrowing the Democratic Iranian government in 1959 and placing the puppet Shah in its place.

[Steven Vasquez]

The IMF, WHO, and WTO are supposed to help impoverished nations, but every country they touch overtime becomes significantly worse off. Countries that used to export food, now have to import food because their farms are nationalized, fertilizers are denied, and all the aid for poverty goes to government dictators. They get hooked on massive loans from the IMF (its the Federal Reserve equivalent of the world), and are addicted like crack cocaine, requiring more and more until they no longer can pay for interests and require bailouts. Think Argentina, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Ethiopia, etc.

The US is in the same boat ever since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 (which was passed like the Patriot Act, only worse during Christmas break when most Senators were on break). What most people do not know is that the Federal Reserve is not a government agency (they are as Federal as Federal Express, and they do not have any reserves). It is a private corporation controlled by a cartel of international and domestic banks with no Congressional oversight or audits, secret meetings, and their membership is hidden. It was designed by the 6 wealthiest people of the time that represented 25% of the world's wealth at the time. It was designed to prevent the expansion of competing banks and to put the full liability of their operations on the American taxpayer.

[Steven Vasquez]

Before the Federal Reserve, currency was only created by the United States Treasury (United States Notes) and backed by a stable commodity such as gold and silver which for over 160 years stopped inflation to be only a few cents fluctuation. Afterwards, Congress delegated this authority (which is unConstitutional) to these unregulated private banks by issuing Treasuries (IOUS) to the Federal Reserve, in return they print Federal Reserve Notes which the US Government (you, the tax payer) has to pay interest on. Yes, under the Constitution, we do not have to pay interest for the simple act of creating currency. Under the Federal Reserve, most of the income tax we pay today goes to paying this interest (not build roads, pay for schools, go to war, etc.). That is why the Income Tax and IRS was also passed in 1913. Before that, it was unConstitutional and considered immoral to tax direct wages for services. The government made money from corporate taxes, use fees, etc. Today income tax represents 40% of the federal governments revenue, if we were to eliminate it, we would have to reduce our spending to 1997 levels when Clinton was in office. JFK was against the Federal Reserve and issued United States greenbacks that were not Federal Reserve Notes. Unfortunately, they were quickly removed from circulation the year after he was assasinated.

[Yermammy]

Funny! I got back into politics when I overheard that rethug primary where Ron talked about "blowback" and why 9/11 happened. Wow, I was just as impressed as the rethugs were jaw dropped stunned. Knock him if you will (I won't, even though I can't agree with Lazy Fairy economics, I CAN agree with killing the Fed and backing money with Gold. Guess how much gold Iran has- TONS).
Points to consider about the "funeral director".
John McCain (back when he was in the House) said Ron "is the most honest man in Washington".
Ron voted NO on:
Military Commissions Act.
Patriot Act.
New FISA Bill
Funding for the War
THE WAR
Any pay increase for Representatives
Funding for the War on Drugs
Ron Paul was only pushed into adopting Pro-Life (pro birth is more accurate) from zealots that aren't libertarians. The ONLY reason he took earmarks was if he didn't, someone else would. He ALWAYS voted against them. So, knock him all you like, but when the MSM shunned him, I knew he was doing something RIGHT. There's really not much difference between Liberals and Libertarians. Liberty.
I've been a Democrat since '66, but Ron was, is and will continue to be cool with me! :)

[Jesster]

I agree that he's "cool" but I'm still glad he's not president...

[Yermammy]

One word. FISA. Live with it. Ron Paul doesn't compromise his principle for political "expediency". You are going to see a LOT of that "expediency" in our future. I fought AND protested the Viet Nam war, and you can't get any more Liberal than me, but this isn't the Democrat I signed on to. He changes on things he shouldn't and versa vice ( and yeah, I prefer to say it the way it's written in ancient Egyptian).

[charleydan]

I support Ron Paul but him an I do disagree on the pro-life issue. I am evangelical, too.

Ron sees it strictly as a life or human. Therefore, it has individual freedoms and rights. Has nothing to do with what others believe.

That would be a law without few exceptions. Exceptions that personally I would see exceptable. I am still arguing with myself what is exceptable.

Libertarians argue over this as when does life begin. Some say conception and others birth.

Yet they all agree this should not be a Federal government decision, but a state decision. The law should be formed state level and most states could not afford funding abortions. At best a limited basis.

That is why both Democrats and Republicans reject Paul. He wants to cut the Fed Reserve which limits the government expansion or programs. Thereby, small government because they can not print money that only creates deflation magnified.

[MarsAmbassador]

"Ron Paul was only pushed into adopting Pro-Life (pro birth is more accurate) from zealots that aren't libertarians."

I'm not so sure. That is one of only a few issues I sharply disagree with Dr. Paul over, so I've paid attention to his statements on it quite closely and I think the fact he was an obstetrician and has delivered over 4000 babies has definitely had more effect on his abortion stance than feeling some exterior pressure to just fall in line. You've seen the primary debates, you know that Dr. Paul is of a type of integrity that is just not seen in politicians, and is not afraid to air his thoughts no matter how controversial to the typical Rethug these days, so I do not believe he would simply toe a line if he didn't honestly believe it himself. Not only that, but the Constitutionalist in him wants to revisit Roe vs. Wade and look at letting the states decide individually.

But he's a thinker, so he weighs the issues, and comes to his conclusions based on his system of ethics, morals, common sense and Constitutional understanding. And I'm not so sure I'd feel the same way I do now about abortion if I had delivered 4000 babies into the world, either. That would give you a MUCH different perspective on the entire situation. But who knows.

[UNCLEJOE]

Ron Paul was the only candidate that recognized Americas-core problem; the Federal Reserve Bank. And RP advocated dismantling the FED and returning the control of the US Monetary system back to the Congress where Art. One in the constitution states it belongs.
His second biggest advocacy was withdrawing from Iraq immediately.
The only reason I would not vote for RP was that he was a Republican, the party of the 'SPEND AND HiDDEN TAXES'; Inflation !

[BSPopper]

UNCLEJOE sez:

The only reason I would not vote for RP was that he was a Republican, the party of the 'SPEND AND HiDDEN TAXES'; Inflation !

Oh, please, smear Ron Paul by association with those whom he fights. Can you instead blame his detractors and enemies for what they do, rather than their victim(s)?

The mainstream Republican and Democrat politicians are both the problem. Which did you vote for, since you would not vote for the most honest man around since Barry Goldwater?

[thirty3na3rd]

The Republican Party's treatment of Ron Paul shows how little respect they have for the Constitution. Their continued delusioned belief that traditional conservativism has no place in the current GOP shows why they'll never recover the power they just squandered: They've spit in the face of part of their membership by ridiculing a sincere statesman among them. Rest in peace, neo-rightists.

[Indubio]

Ron Paul wasn't taken serious because his ideas are off the charts. Yes, he fired some folks up and raised a lot of money but the man is so far to the right he makes George Bush seem like a friggin moderate. Every single one of the man's domestic policies, I do mean every one, are right of Reagan. So great... let the GOP adopt the ideas of Paul and they'll find themselves in the wilderness for ever. The electorate supports abortion, separation of church and state, graduated income tax, and a national healthcare system. Paul is a well spoken fiscal and social conservative and his policies were for the most part just rejected by the electorate so how does adopting them help the GOP? He's got no more of chance of ever being elected then Dennis Kucinich. Both men are far too fringe for most voters.

[gbrooks]

Yeah, they're "fringe", mostly because they're the only politicians who are actually concerned about regular people and have ideals that they actually stick to.

Rejected by the very ignorant electorate, in my opinion. Reject them at your own peril, guys like these are our watchdogs,

[Jesster]

I'm more than pleased to have him as a "watch dog" but for heaven's sake, please don't make him president!

[Peter007]

True that both candidates would never be accepted in the mainstream. But Pauls' ideas are not his own. They are from the US Constitution and are similar to Thomas Jefferson's ideas. I don't think the terms left wing and right wing can be applied to Ron Paul's or Libertarian ideas. Is the US Constitution left wing or right wing? Are the Bill of Rights Conservative or Liberal?. You decide. I don't agree that his policies were rejected by the voters. I think HE was rejected by the voters because frankly, he just doesn't look the part. Central casting.....send someone taller and younger.

[Yermammy]

"Central casting.....send someone taller and younger."
OMFG! LOL! That's it, my man! The sheep in this country have been "conditioned" to American Idol and who wants to dance with a millionaire survivor. Dennis Kucinich is a homely looking little fellow. The absolute bravest, most patriotic Democrat, bar NONE. When the Limousine Liberal Nancy took Impeachment "off the table", Dennis said "I don't think so". Corporate owned media isn't going to allow Dennis or Paul any air time or give them credit. Why in hell would they? If you were a corporation that was outsourcing YOUR jobs, union busting and letting our heavy industry die on the vine, why in hell would you give these fellows a SECOND of recognition? It's obvious if you know how this CFR controlled satellite REALLY works. LOL! Incredible.

[cswake]

Yeh, he's so far right supporting things like ending the war in Iraq, the war on Drugs, killing the Patriot Act, and numerous other bills that infringe on our Constitutional rights. Right or Left does NOT apply to him.

[BSPopper]

The left-right spectrum, which ranges from "fascism" on the "right", to "communism" on the "left", does not acknowledge the difference between liberty and tyranny; it only varies from tyranny to tyranny. It is a red herring to obscure the true subject of the struggle, liberty vs. tyranny.

I never use the "left-right" spectrum, because the struggle between liberty over tyranny is always the issue.

[Yermammy]

You don't know much history. DO YOU? LOL. Ron Paul QUIT the Republican Party and DENOUNCED Ronnie Raygun for not holding to true Republican principles. Raygun "talked" conservative and spent "drunken sailor". That's why he ran as a Libertarian in '88. After that, He realized this corrupt two party system would not be viable for a third party run, and that is the ONLY reason he ran as a rethug , this time- to be viable. The only problem with that is the corporations that REALLY run this country ain't hearing THAT noise. The ironic thing about Raygun is, if it wasn't for Ron Paul campaigning for him, he NEVER would have been President! NO.
His ideas aren't off the charts. You just don't know what liberty is. Corporate Media TELLS YOU what to think, and you go Baaaaaaaaa­aaaaaaaaaa­aaaaaa.
Ron Paul is a true patriot and statesman. Don't forget it, chum.

[situationcritical]

You left out Ron Paul's membership in the John Birch Society.

[gbrooks]

Lee Stranahan: My new hero.

Great piece.

Those sominabitches dismissed us, treated us like lepers and lost the best opportunity they had to compete. The RP Revolution is a brilliant mix of age-old wisdom, knowledge and a sense of history with young technology, enthusiasm, and creativity.

Many in the RP revolution went over to Obama to keep McCain/Palin out, but they still retain those libertarian values.

Viva la revolucion!

[brynn6]

I listen to C-Span most mornings and their phone-in campaign was astonishing. Every one of the RP supporters must have been dialing in to get so many on. They're going to have to give up some of the religious right stances though to get any traction. Individual rights, unless you're a female then others get to make decisions for you isn't going to cut it.

[Peter007]

If you are talking about abortion than Ron Pauls ideas may not suit you. They are not religious ideas but his idea of when human life starts. We all have an opinion of when human life starts and abortion is a gray issue. My opinion is that abortion is not a good event but nobody should go to jail because of it. Its not a police issue.