2004 Constitution Party ticket on Ron Paul for President ‘08

In 2004 Michael Peroutka and Chuck Baldwin were, respectively, the presidential and vice-presidential candidates of the Constitution Party. In his most recent column, Chuck Baldwin writes:

Congressman Ron Paul of Texas embodies everything the CEP is looking for. Beyond that, if he should miraculously win the nomination, he would, no doubt, receive broad support in the general election. He would solidify the conservative base of the GOP and would be very popular among independents, libertarians, and even conservative Democrats.

The problem is, the GOP leadership, including the money-machine, refuses to support the independent-minded Ron Paul. They want another puppet to carry out the marching orders of their CFR cronies. However, if rank and file Republicans, and if Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, and other leaders of the Religious Right, would support Ron Paul, the globalist elitists within the GOP could be defeated.

Absent a Ron Paul nomination, true conservatives will have nowhere to go next year, except to a third party. In fact, it is my prayer that if Paul does not obtain the Republican nomination, he would lead the exodus to the Constitution Party.

You can read the rest here

Last month, Michael Peroutka was interviewed on Mark Dankof’s radio show and discussed the 2008 presidential race and Ron Paul for President. The archives were down for awhile but the archive is now up. You can go to and choose from several formats. The show is archived at the Tuesday, February 13, 9 AM hour.

66 Responses to “2004 Constitution Party ticket on Ron Paul for President ‘08”

  1. undercover_anarchist Says:

    I’m going to change my name from undercover_anarchist to globalist_elitist. Henceforth, that is what I shall be known by.

  2. Yosemite1967 Says:

    I know I’ve said this before, but I just wanted to reiterate it for anyone who missed it in the previous related article:

    CP needs to propose the following to Ron Paul (which it sounds like they might be considering, from what I hear):

    CP gets behind Paul in the Republican primary. If he wins, they stay behind him as a Republican. If he loses, they take him on as the CP candidate.

  3. Yosemite1967 Says:

    UA, there’s no difference between those two terms in the long run. :^)

  4. globalist_elitist Says:

    Please illuminate: What does CEP stand for? (Constitutional E Party?)

  5. Yosemite1967 Says:

    CEP was a reference to the “Conservative Exodus Project” mentioned in the source article (but that part was not quoted above).

  6. globalist_elitist Says:

    Conservative Exodus? They want to leave the country? Where do I send my check? Or do I have to pay in worthless baubles?

  7. Trent Hill Says:

    Conservative Exodus,as in they are promising to leave the Republican party.

  8. Mike Gillis Says:

    This is a very bad move on the part of the Constitution Party. We had a similar situation with the Greens and the Kucinich campaign.

    Kucinich worked to actively re-register Greens as Democrats to support him in the primary and most of the time, after the primary, they stay with the major party and the candidate you support just tries to pied-piper them into supported the vanilla candidate that DOES win the nomination.

    It’s not worth sacrificing your own party’s independence (and registered members) for a quixotic primary challenged that is doomed to failure.

  9. globalist_elitist Says:

    They always talk about a Green-Libertarian alliance or a Constitution-Libertarian alliance - the obvious alliance is the Greens and CP. They’re both dominated by racist thugs who think that might makes right and that capitalist self-interest is the root of all evil. Maybe you can unite behind a Lou Dobbs fusion candidacy with the motto “It’s the economy, we’re stupid.”

  10. Robert Milnes Says:

    Mike, agreed. What is needed is the opposite-Greens & LP drawing support & voters FROM the dems & reps. This would leave Ron Paul & the gop & CP to lose. g_e/u_a, There you go again, again’ everybody except maybe the groucho marxists. Exception: I don’t see how you can call the greens racist. They are largely racial minority. CEP-Conservative Exodus Program-good-bye & get lost.

  11. globalist_elitist Says:

    The Green position on trade is, like all protectionism, on an updated version of white supremacy. Plus, the Greens are entirely patronizing to racial minorities, which is racist in its own way.

    I’m waiting for a true capitalist to run for president. Maybe Larry Page or Sergey Brin when they get old enough.

  12. globalist_elitist Says:

    John Mackey - that would be a great candidate.

  13. Sam Marsh Says:

    I would like to see Libertarians (like myself) and Constitution Party folks supporting Paul in the primary season for one reason: Ron Paul is the only hardcore constitutionalist that is going to be on national TV for any real amount of time this year. As far as I can see this is the only chance to put small government to the general public in this election season. Everyone else who isn’t a RepoCrat will be marginalized by the media and unknown to the masses. That’s the nature of what third parties are up against. They just don’t exist to the public. Our ideas are largely unheard, especially in detail.
    I’ll vote Libertarian if and when Paul is out of the Republican race, but I have no reason not to support this good man right now when it can do some real good for the longer term goal of re-establishing Constitutional limitations on the federal government.

  14. Robert Milnes Says:

    g_e/u_a, John Mackey was mentioned to me by Dr. Carl. However I have been unable to find a place & date of birth for him. Sam, there is another possibility. If the greens & libs were to announce an alliance, it would get a lot of mainstream attention. That ticket would get double digit polling & into the debates. Q.: Is support for RP now diverting support from libs?

  15. Mike Gillis Says:

    “That ticket would get double digit polling & into the debates.”

    I’m an optimist, but THAT is so unlikely to be laughable.

  16. Joel Lemieux Says:

    Presidential Politics - Give Us Your Two Cents Worth

    “Cynicism and defeatism are NOT options to be entertained.

    We are in the eleventh hour of losing this Nation…”

    Is it worth two cents per day for “Honesty” from your President?

    (it is the question you should be asking everyone you meet)


  17. Sam Marsh Says:

    The combined media attention given to Michael Badnarik and David Cobb when they both got ARRESTED at the debates was a gigantic ZERO! Only a celebrity will change that. Yes, Ron Paul will take votes away from the LP as long as he is in the race because he IS a Libertarian. I don’t think we can get around that. Now, if a minor party coalition throws its support to Paul, it might get him the nomination (a longshot, I know), and a real chance at beating Hillary.

  18. NLandholt Says:

    I believe CE stands for Christian Exodus…the movement to have Christians relocate to and take control of South Carolina.

  19. Joseph Says:

    I’ve endorsed Paul for the GOP nod, but changing registration or expending resources would be a waste of time: from the first Republican president (the constitution-hating Lincoln) to the Ayatollah George, that is an AUTHORITARIAN party and they will not nominate a pro-freedom candidate. Goldwater was the closest they ever came.

  20. globalist_elitist Says:

    The Libertarian support for a mercantilist like Ron Paul shows why they will NEVER, EVER win the support of the business community. Capitalism needs a party, and the Libertarians aren’t it.

  21. Trent Hill Says:

    UA,where do you get that Paul is a mercantilist?


    No,this is the CEP, a conservative block of voters who vow to vote Constitution Party if the Republicans dont elect a conservative.

  22. Andy Says:

    “undercover_anarchist Says:

    March 20th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
    I’m going to change my name from undercover_anarchist to globalist_elitist. Henceforth, that is what I shall be known by.”

    This is a more honest nickname since you are not a real anarchist.

  23. Andy Says:

    “Trent Hill Says:

    March 21st, 2007 at 11:28 am
    UA,where do you get that Paul is a mercantilist?”

    I already EXPOSED his asertation that Ron Paul is a mercantilist as a LIE on another thread. UA or GE or whatever he wants to call himself is not really interested in facts, like Hitler he thinks that if he repeats his lies often enough people will believe them.

  24. globalist_elitist Says:

    Andy is delusional.

    “Mercantilism is an economic theory which holds that the prosperity of a nation depends upon its supply of capital, and that the global volume of trade is “unchangeable.” Capital, represented by bullion (gold, silver, and trade value) held by the state, is best increased through a positive balance of trade with other nations (exports minus imports). Mercantilism suggests that the ruling government should advance these goals by playing a protectionist role in the economy, by encouraging exports and discouraging imports, especially through the use of tariffs.”

    How does this not represent the CP economic philosophy?

    It is as old and discredited as their bogus religion.

    As for the name change: I never claimed to be an anarchist. That’s where the “undercover” came in. I work in the financial services industry, so compared to many in my world, I am “anarchistic” - i.e., distrusting of authority, particularly of the state. “globalist_elitist,” coined by the racist mercantalist, Chuck Baldwin, is a better name. I am a globalist. “Elitist” is how ignorant protectionists and restrictionists perceive people who are smarter and more educated than them. So it fits the bill.

  25. globalist_elitist Says:

    By the way, the CP, GP, and their counterparts in the GOP and Democratic Party, are the real “elitists” - even though they’re far from “elite.” They want to make the purchasing decisions for ME and YOU. They want to limit the market for my products or services because THEY KNOW BETTER than the market. They want to prevent me from hiring a Bangaldeshi computer progammer and paying him 5X the average daily wage for his country, because it’s unfair to “our own” American computer programmers - who are less skilled and demand wages as much as 20 times higher. They think that (white) Americans are superior to the (brown) people of the rest of the world.


  26. globalist_elitist Says:

    By the way, if all of the Christians moved to South Carolina to have White Rule, could we somehow nuke the state without affecting the rest of the country or at least the North? Just asking.

  27. Trent Hill Says:

    Oh ya, bcuz it is extremely likely that you would hire a Bangladeshi computer program so you could pay him 5X the average daily wage. Chances are that you might pay him slightly more. Unfortunately he will still be grossly underpaid, with no benefits and an oppresive government who is probably going to overtax them.
    I just love how you turn everything into racism UA.
    “They think that (white) Americans are superior to the (brown) people of the rest of the world.”
    All americans are white,and all non-americans are brown right? lol. Even if you WERE referring specifically to the Bangladeshi,why wsould the American be white? You DO realize that the computer programming field is one which is open to ALL races right?

    “How does this not represent the CP economic philosophy?”
    -um,it represents it just fine. But we didnt ask about the CP, we asked how RON PAUL was a mercantilist. You purposefully sidestepped this question.

  28. globalist_elitist Says:

    Not true. I hire Bangladeshi programmers all the time. I have a group of four currently working for me. They are being paid $4,000 to do a job that will take a total of three months. That’s one man-year. The average daily wage is $2. They’re getting paid, over $10 a day each.

    To get the same work done in the U.S. would cost me maybe $200,000. I could not afford it. But I pay Bangladeshis to do it, and I can start my own business. Now I create more wealth for everyone.

    How is this a bad situation? The Bangaldeshi gets paid 5X the average wage for his country, I get work for a fraction of the cost, a new business is created that otherwise would not have been created.

    And just because you don’t understand economics, let me make it clear to you: The Bangladeshi gets paid 5X the average wage because that’s the market value. I don’t pay him that out of the kindness of my heart; although I have given $20 bonuses to people in the Ukraine or Romania that have made their weeks. Why? Out of my rational self interest. Those guys will be more likely to contract with me again in the future if they are happy with me as a boss.

    If Ron Paul does not have the CP’s economic philosophy, then I apologize. I assumed based on your idol worship of him, that he did. I know he is anti-free-trade, anti-immigration, and pro-gold-standard. Those are hallmarks of mercantalism.

  29. globalist_elitist Says:

    I used the white/brown paradigm because American nationalism is a vestige of white supremacy. I predict that one day soon, white racists will be accepting of blacks - or at least tolerant. Blacks, even in the eyes of most racists, are “Americans.” But no matter what Mexicans, Indians, or Chinese ever do, in the eyes of people like you, they’re never “Americans.” This is the new form of racism in America. As for “brown,” the majority of people outside of the U.S. are brown. This is how racists think of foreigners. However, people in Ukraine, Romania, etc., might as well be brown in the eyes of mercantile racists like yourself.

    The reason it all comes back to racism is because racism is the crudest form of collectivism, and is the ideological basis for anticapitalism. It always has been. Christianity/religion, is a strong #2. Speaking of strong #2s, I have to go take one and wipe my ass with the Communist Manifesto/Bible. Which would be more offensive to a mercantlist like yourself? Both seem to be holy books to you.

  30. Gary Odom Says:

    Hey UA, now, GE…here’s a thought. Why don’t you simply use your own name and stop using an alias. If you are as strongly opinionated as you suggest why don’t you show the courage of your convictions and just state your name. Do you think anyone is really going to care anyway?

  31. globalist_elitist Says:

    I use my real name in my professional life, in which I deal with many Christians, Republicans, “liberal” Democrats, etc. If a Google of my name showed up with a bunch of vitriol like I post here, then whenever a potential client looked me up, it would be very bad for business. If it’s important for you to know my identity, I have made it known here before. I was the Green Party candidate for Congress in MI-7, 2004. Now I am a radical for capitalism, trying to absolve myself of the sins of statism that I promoted as a younger man.

    The reason it is fun debating with CP folks is that they think they’re capitalists. They think they’re not racists. When the real Nazi came in here, that was no fun. I like having fun. This is fun to me. If you aren’t having fun with this banter, then simply ignore me.

  32. Trent Hill Says:

    It is absurd of you to call people racist and then group Americans into the “White” category and non-americans into the “brown” category. Or even to make a sweeping statement like “most people outside the U.S. are brown”.

    Well iv got news for you UA. “Browns” are not the “most oppressed people in history”. IN the history of the U.S., the Blacks and Irishmen were probably treated worst, with the Asians close behind.

    Also, another bit of dissapointing news for someone who uses the “race card” everywhere he goes. Accusing me of racism against “Browns” won’t work, as i’ll be marrying a Cuban in December.

  33. globalist_elitist Says:

    I don’t view people through a collectivist racial parascope. Racism is just a form of collectivism; cruder than most, but no better or worse.

    For you to allege that Irishmen were treated as badly as blacks… That’s classic. Are you Irish? Put it this way: There are a lot of black people with Irish names, if you catch my drift.

    Look: I am against collectivism, period. I am for individualism. Racism, religion, nationalism are all forms of collectivism. They impede the march towards capitalist progress. You have admitted yourself to not be a capitalist (you’re an admitted mercantalist), which is the source of our disagreement.

    Good luck in your marriage. I’m sure your Cuban partner and her family can tell you what’s wrong with collectivism.

  34. globalist_elitist Says:

    Hey, I’m getting tired of debating. I need to take a break for a while.

    It’s been good fun. But people are starting to get annoyed with me, and that’s not my bag.


  35. Sean Scallon Says:

    If Ron Paul doesn’t win the GOP nomination he’s going back to Texas to run for his Congressional seat. End of story. Those looking to run for the LP or CP nominations shouldn’t suspend their campaigns unless Paul wins the GOP nomination.

  36. George Phillies Says:

    One candidate cannot possibly represent the political objectives of the Libertarian and Constitution Parties at the same time.

    I will not speak to what a Constitution Party candidate should do. I don’t belong to that party.

    In America, it is party, not individual personality, that substantially determines what happens in politics. The Republican Party is the Party of war based on lies, warrantless wiretaps, a corrupted justice department, and the kidnapping and torture of an American citizen. The only support a real Libertarian should give the drowning Republican Party was summed up by another non-Libertarian political strategist “When your enemies are drowning, throw them some anvils”.

    A vote for a Republican, any Republican, is a vote in support of war, corruption, warrantless wiretaps, police state ID papers, and torture. For starters.

  37. matt Says:

    What better way to toss the GOP an anvil than to shove their least favorite congressman down their throats? If it works, it will split the party, if it doesn’t it will expose their weakest point and serve as a great talking point for LPers in the future.

    I watch the blogs pretty closely. If Ron Paul was wiretapping people’s phones without a warrant, I would have heard about it.

    And since when is it ok to compromise with people inside of the party but not with people outside of it? It smacks of anti-liberty cliqueishness, I think.

    Ron Paul is probably more ‘ideologically pure’ than half of the state-level LP candidates last cycle. He has a better chance of winning as well.

    Libertarians (at their worst) are like lobsters in a bucket. Whenever a lobster is making progress to climb out of the bucket, the other lobsters pull him back down. That’s not cool. Right now, Ron Paul is our fastest climbing lobster, and I’m going to push him rather than pull him down and pick at him.

  38. X Says:

    A vote for a Republican is also a vote against a sensible and libertarian immigration policy. Of course, the same could be said about a vote for George Phillies, who shares Ron Paul’s (and Tom Tancredo’s) immigration stance.

  39. matt Says:

    That’s just my point. We aren’t going to get enlightened immigration policy in 2008.

    We just might get a civil liberties, antiwar, small government candidate. Ron Paul is just as good or better than Phillies on all 3 points, I think, plus he’s got name recognition.

    One advantage that Paul has over Tancredo is his eschewal of racial slurs. Tancredo is the George Wallace of the immigration issue.

  40. matt Says:

    worse, actually.

  41. SovereignMN Says:

    What are your examples of Tancredo using racial slurs? I have not followed it closely.

  42. Trent Hill Says:

    I havent heard Tancredo use racial slurs at all. And I follow him pretty closely.

    Phillies, I pray you dont win the nomination. Ron Paul is about five hundred thousand times better than any LP or CP candidate,and can easily represent the small-government hopes of both parties. for you to think you are better is not only arrogant,but flagrantly incorrect.

  43. Eric Donfascist Says:

    Rudy Giuliani picked up the surprise endorsement of super Constitutionalist Conservative US Senator David Duke of Louisiana yesterday. Duke said that Giuliani had the leadership skills that are badly needed since we are at War with a bunch of dirty Semites.

    “Look, the last time that happened we had a very effective alliance between an Austrian immigrant and an Italian leader and I see no reason why we can’t just do the same thing again. Why fuck around with a formula that works?” said Duke.

    Latest poll numbers have Giuliani at anywhere from 47% to 65%. Duke was quick to point out that Mussolini’s poll numbers were in the same range right before the March on Rome.

    Latest poll numbers have Cong. Ron Paul at anywhere from 0% to 2%.
    That dirty anti-fascist bum! Unpopular people like him should be beaten with bundles of sticks.

    Giuliani toilet paper at http://www.pieman.org/rottenrudy.htm

  44. matt Says:

    I’d say that calling Miami a “third world country” just because there are some permanent suntans going around qualifies as a slur. It’s maybe borderline, and that’s the worst one I could think of, so maybe I should have said “semi-slur”.

  45. Yosemite1967 Says:

    Phillies said, “In America, it is party, not individual personality, that substantially determines what happens in politics.”
    This is exactly what’s wrong with America, and it’s what’s allowing everything else that’s wrong with America to continue unchecked.

    “A vote for a Republican, any Republican, is a vote in support of war, corruption, warrantless wiretaps, police state ID papers, and torture. For starters.”
    This might be true of some high-ranking members of the party (Bush et al), but to pretend that everyone who is a member of the party is culpable for these things is prejudicial and stereotypical. I support the Constitution Party because the Republican party is far more compromised, but to imply that electing Ron Paul on the Republican ticket will result in more lie-based wars, warrantless wiretaps, and torture seems a terrible stretch.

    “When your enemies are drowning, throw them some anvils”
    Ron Paul is not the enemy of true conservatism, regardless of what ticket he runs on. To suggest that we should throw him an anvil if he runs on the Republican ticket smacks of a very vested interest.

  46. George Phillies Says:

    In America it is party….yes, that is how America works, whether people like it or not, and there are good understandable reasons why it will continue to be that way. When you vote for a Republican, you are buttressing the people at the top, Bush, his Congressional supporters, and the Republicans lower down the elective ladder. One of my objectives is to convince otherwise decent Americans that they should not be supporting the Republican Party.

    I will not argue whether or not Ron Paul is an enemy of true conservatism, a philosophy for which I have no use, though Richard Viguerie’s remarks at the Orlando meeting (newspaper coverage dropped the key quote) were revealing. “True conservatism” has been one of the antiliberty philosophies in America since National Review championed “States Rights” as a path to denying blacks the right to vote and women the right to an abortion.

  47. Robert Milnes Says:

    It looks like I side with George on this issue. Never Again vote republican.

  48. Trent Hill Says:

    Of course you do Milnes, you and Phillies represent the leftist Libertarians.

  49. Jake Porter Says:

    George Phillies represents Libertarians, like me, who want to actually build the Libertarian Party and not campaign on extreme issues that have Americans running away in fear. A libertarian running in the Republican Party cannot build the Libertarian Party. He cannot campaign with our candidates; provide them with free radio ads, etc. I wish Ron Paul the best and it is important to remember that he and George are not running against each other.

    Jake Porter
    National Mobilization Facilitator
    Phillies for President

  50. Eric Donfascist Says:

    The problem with George Phillies and Ron Paul is that they are Islamo-Fascist
    Leftist Anti-Americans.

    We need strong, rugged, handsome, Pro-Defense candidates. In fact I think it should be illegal for Leftist Anti-Americans like Phillies and Paul to run for office. They should just be treated as Enemy Combatants along with everyone else who is against the War on Terror. If you are not with us you are with the terrorists!

    We could still have elections, of course. There is no reason why we can’t have Wayne Root declared right now by Executive Order to be the next Libertarian candidate, and Giuliani could be declared to be next Republican candidate by signing statement. After that the Supreme Court could declare a pro-America Democrat like Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman to be the next Donkey candidate. We could even have a cool Rocker like Dale Thompson run on the Constution Party ticket.

    But we would probably just have to ban the Green Party and Ralph Nader.

    Then we could decide the whole thing with hanging chads.

    It would be totally rad and very Mainstream Libertarian!

  51. d Says:

    Go to hell eric, once again you try to sabotage your old boss.

    Ron Paul is a great man. Man worthy of presidency. US will prosper immeasurably if he wins office. Every single youtube video of Ron Pauls speeches in congress and his interviews shows us the greatness of this man.

    His voting record is awesome. Its all for the public to see for themsevles.

    Support Ron, it just might be the only hope US has, before its financial irresponsibility, disdain for human rights and out of control interventionism catches up with it and destroys the nation entirely and irreversibly.

  52. globalist_elitist Says:

    “US will prosper immeasurably if he wins office.”

    If you mean sink into a Depression that makes the 1930s look like the 1990s, then yeah, I agree.

    That wasn’t Eric who posted the above. It was a jokester.

  53. Eric Donfascist Says:


    You sound like an Anti-American Muslim Radical Leftist. Which is what you are. An Enemy Combatant. A Bin-Ladinite Saddamite Islamo-Fascist.

    Disdain for Human Rights? Financial irresponsibility? Talking like that about our Homeland and our President is just aid and comfort to our Jihadist enemies. It is nothing short of treason.

    9/11 changed everything. We are at war. Traitors in a time war, like you and your Islamo-Fascist treasonous french-loving surrender monkey politicians you support should, can and will be rounded up and put to work in Halliburton-constructed, Prison Corporation of America-administered
    Freedom Through Work™ camps, and living and working in these camps will finally make you appreciate this great country and Commander in Chief.

    Soon, you will swell up with tears at the thought of your overwhelmong love for the Decider, and you will feel an uncontrollable need to shower and wash of the leftist, anti-American, pro-Muslim filth off you and be cleansed in the name of Bush the Father, Bush the Son, and the Holy Ghost of Richard Nixon.

    I guess what I’m really trying to say is that I’m a Global Elitist Mainstream Libertarian and you’re not! Nah nah nah nah boo boo.

  54. globalist_elitist Says:

    Phillies: Change your Ron-Paul-inspired, anticapitalist positions on trade and immigration and I will send you $100. Read Ricardo.

  55. Eric Donfascist Says:


    It’s nice to see how we are coming to agree on so many issues. But I assure you that I am no jokester. I’m very serious. If only you knew how serious I am, it would make your head spin, and possibly projectile vomit, like that chick in the Exorcist.

  56. Eric Donfascist Says:


    Change your position on the war on terror and we won’t send you to a Freedom Through Work™ camp. Read Wayne Allyn Root!

  57. Yosemite1967 Says:

    ua/ge, looks like someone (edf) is eyeing your “most hyperbolic, vulgar, offensive, and irrelevant” crown.

  58. Trent Hill Says:

    No,Eric Donfascist is even more gross. At least UA used sarcasm well. Donfascist is a shock-jock.

  59. globalist_elitist Says:

    I want Donfascists’s true identity exposed!

    I bet it is Stuart Richards, the long-lost long-haired libertarian blogger. I don’t know why, but that is my hunch.

  60. Eric Donfascist Says:

    Not Stu. But I won’t give too many more answers like that, I’ve already given two.

    I’m Eric Donfascist. That is my true identity. Like many other important fascist executives, I have a typist/secretary, but that person’s name is not important.
    Why do you care about an unimportant, disposable piece of hired help?

    The important people are the Millionaires, Celebrities, and Fascist Corporate Executives. Not people like my transcriber. People like me, the highly important Libertarian Republican consultant, Eric Donfascist the Turd!

  61. matt Says:

    Doesn’t lampooning usually involve making the victim’s opinions even more radical than they already are and laughing at the wacky extremism? That’s always the defenition I used.

    All I’m saying, Dondero, is that you’re a hard guy to lampoon. Sometimes the Donfascist character sounds more moderate than you.

  62. Eric Donfascist Says:


    I’m not trying to lampoon Eric Dondero. It’s a pure coincidence that we have similar names, are both very important Mainstream Libertarian Republican political consultants, Swingers, and Honorably Discharged, Pro-Defense, Combat Veterans.

    As such, we have earned the right to say whatever we want.

    Haven’t you ever seen Triumph of the Will?


  63. matt Says:

    Olay, but Dondero is still crazier than you.

  64. Andy Says:

    “If Ron Paul does not have the CP’s economic philosophy, then I apologize. I assumed based on your idol worship of him, that he did. I know he is anti-free-trade, anti-immigration, and pro-gold-standard. Those are hallmarks of mercantalism.”

    You clearly don’t know what the fuck you are talking about.

  65. newrepublicans.us » Blog Archive » The game is a foot… Says:

    [...] After much forensics, and turning up some logging to get a more granular view of why we seem to be getting so many Ron Paul supporters here these days, I found this link in the logs. They sure are an industrious group. It seems that they are hitting every poll that they can find in order to inflate Dr. Ron Paul’s numbers. You want more proof, here is another site working to inflate the numbers. Which if anyone is counting, he is currently at 3% (which I think is quite generous) of those likely to vote in ‘08 according to Zogby.  These guys have him at 2%. Honesty, I’ve seen other  polls that have him with a static 1% of the vote. A little early in the game I think for these kind of tactics. Some online polls have removed Ron Paul all together, like this one from strawpoll08.com. Pajamas Media had to turn up their anti-spamming measures due to the targeted attacks of the Ron Paul supporters. You have to give them credit for being an organized group. Again we see the Ron Paul spammers attacking the poll - his numbers are way off chart, and in only a couple of hours after this week opened he got over 700 votes. Very suspicious… I hope PM’s tech team take a hard look again at those spammers. Talking about spammers, I see here on this comment section lots of comments attributed to different names but with basically the same words. Are the Ron Paul spammers attacking here too? I am very libertarian myself (although I prefer Giuliani), it’s a shame that Ron Paul supporters are resorting to dirty tactics to influence a - get real people! - totally random poll like this.. thats really funny that you have the audacity to put the words libertarian and Giuliani in the same sentence, if its proven that Pauls poll numbers are already being spammed then that should be dealt with, but expect to see overwhelming support for Ron Paul from this point forward from people fed up with the current system  [Sure when monkey’s fly out of my…  - moving on] Watching the Soccermoms and Girls cheer on the War on Terra made it worth clicking overhere to vote for Ron Paul. Thanks, all. [What? really what the hell is that supposed to mean?]  …trampled the Constitution, gotten thousands of American soldiers killed and maimed in an illegal, undeclared war. They have caused government power and government debt to rise to unprecidented heights. [hmm, Patriot Act, War on Terror, and I can’t disagree with that last one. more about this in a minute] Let them have fun fooling themselves. Ron Paul is the only one fit for the Whitehouse. Watch as the true conservatives leave the Rino’s behind. They are closer to destroying the Republican party then they know. The fist 1000 have aready jumped ship! and I am positive there are atleast 8 for every one who signed the petition. [Apparently someone is a little confused about the term RINO, we’ll get to that one too] I’m voting for “Ron Paul” all day! The ONLY person who stands for liberty and DESERVES to be in the whitehouse. [yes we ALL know, ALL of us, EVERYONE with a blog, a poll, and Ron Paul’s name on it, we KNOW already] [...]

  66. DEAN BERRY Says:

    The white male is under seige like never before yet conservatives are doing absolutely nothing about it: http://wellsfargoreversediscrimination.blogspot.com

Leave a Reply