digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at abcnews.go.com

Ron Paul to keep his day job

abcnews.go.com — Ron Paul won the race in Texas to keep his seat in Congress, reinforcing his libertarian-leaning message.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Jovensdesciple, on 03/05/2008, -140/+33Ron Paul supporters are probably not safe to ***** with.
    • ncurses, on 03/05/2008, -83/+19yeah they're crazy *****
      • troye, on 03/06/2008, -9/+12We are crazy with love for our country!
      • flapjackman176, on 03/06/2008, -22/+4Yes, crazy for ruining this country. One dumb ass politician at a time.

        lol buried for the lunatic supporters on this site.
        • Bagos1, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5He won at a local level. Something we seem to dismiss. All politics are local...and should be.
        • DefendThyself, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Excuse my French, though in this case, you deserve it: ***** YOU!, he is the only hope for the Republic. Ass hats like you are the problem with this country.
    • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -9/+69Crazy like a fox!
      • cdahlkvist, on 03/05/2008, -23/+2Crazylikeafox425.com?
        • jrizzo, on 03/05/2008, -12/+4Crazy like a Fox News reporter! ZING!
      • yojiffyskippy, on 03/05/2008, -19/+5Crazy like a ...... um ..... just crazy.
      • lex0nyc, on 03/05/2008, -10/+6But not like Red Fox, because he was black people crazy.
      • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 03/05/2008, -12/+3And full of fleas and ticks!
      • nathew, on 03/06/2008, -5/+1crazy like a guy in a fox suit!
      • rentmitchum, on 03/06/2008, -3/+2Crazy fast like a fox named Swift. People still watch David the Gnome, right? What do the kids like nowadays.. britney spears.. and chingy.. and .. oh who else.. mickey rourke.
    • compdude32, on 03/05/2008, -73/+11Ron Paul Spam, buried.
      • TheG2, on 03/05/2008, -34/+13Listen, I think Ron Paul is ***** crazy too, but just because he made the news doesn't mean its spam.
        • itsthebrod, on 03/05/2008, -14/+63Why is believing in the Constitution ***** crazy?
          • jollins, on 03/05/2008, -23/+9I have a request:
            Will Ron Paul supporters please stop saying that? I've seen this comment quite a few times now. If someone disapproves of Ron Paul, they're not against "believing in the constitution". It's like accusing an anti-war person of hating the troops. There really isn't a connection.
          • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -4/+16I have a request for Obama supporters: stop being so defensive about your big mistake. Obama is not perfect and neither are you. Our constitution is the document which restrains government and ignoring it is resulting in the destruction of our Republic. You are so wrong about there not being a connection between RP and the constitution. WAKE UP!!!
          • jollins, on 03/06/2008, -6/+5Overused, empty phrases like "WAKE UP" are another reason there has been a backlash against all the Ron Paul net support here on digg.
          • ThndrShk2k, on 03/06/2008, -3/+8"Will Ron Paul supporters please stop saying that? I've seen this comment quite a few times now. If someone disapproves of Ron Paul, they're not against "believing in the constitution". It's like accusing an anti-war person of hating the troops. There really isn't a connection."
            They're not going to stop until there is another candidate that would enforce it and respect it as much, or close to it.
            Instead of asking for someone to stop twisting words into what you don't like, why not ask for politicians to actually serve the people better? Like enforcing the constitution. I'm pretty sure that was made so the politicians COULDN'T DO what THEY ARE DOING today.
        • shedmyskin, on 03/05/2008, -12/+1thats ok because I'm pretty sure you ARE ***** crazy
        • compdude32, on 03/05/2008, -16/+3Really, if this was any other representative barely winning his primary it wouldn't even be on digg let alone front page. It is SPAM, just another excuse for diggers to cum over Ron Paul.
      • DefendThyself, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2BURY YOU ASSHAT
    • ozid, on 03/05/2008, -29/+5Ya man they might come find you.

      Oh wait they didn't even come out from behind their computers to vote.
    • kaelyiesta, on 03/05/2008, -15/+80Its ironic that there are so many fanatical ron paul attackers who use the tactic of calling him/his supporters crazy. Time and again I see the following types of comments:

      JESUS I ***** HATE THESE CRAZY PAULTARDS!
      I KNOW! WHY DO THEY ***** SPAM SO MUCH
      RIGHT! THEY ARE FANATICAL!
      YEAH, AND IF YOU SAY ANYTHING BAD THEY GO NUTS, MAN THEY ARE HOSTILE!

      Paraphrased of course.

      You can imagine how silly this is to the more objective observers. The hypocrisy is staggering.
      • Gerz1219, on 03/05/2008, -30/+6The more objective observers tended to vote against Ron Paul by a ten-to-one margin.
        • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -6/+26I think you meant "ignorant" instead of "objective"
          • jollins, on 03/05/2008, -14/+9I'm not ignorant.
            - I want net neutrality.
            - I believe letting the states decide on abortion will just mean that the wealthy will travel to states where abortions are legal whereas the poor will be stuck.
            - I think cutting out 1/3 of the nation's income when we have such a massive debt isn't helpful in the long run.
            I could go on of course...
            Just because someone isn't libertarian doesn't mean they're ignorant.
          • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -4/+12Im not liberterian either. There are bigger issues at stake here than your little selfish desires and misconceptions. Our country is toast.
          • Gerz1219, on 03/05/2008, -15/+4So you believe 95% of the public is ignorant. I wonder why Ron Paul's followers had such a difficult time preaching to the unconverted. I'm sure it couldn't possibly have been the smug self-righteousness of Paulbots.
          • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -1/+15hell yes 90 percent of people are ignorant- oh, that doesn't mean stupid, BTW... but most people think we live in a democracy, most people never read the constitution, most people get their news from TV. yeah, thats ***** IGNORANT!
          • UltraKill, on 03/06/2008, -2/+9@jollins
            I don't think your ignorant for not being a libertarian, but you should look a little more deeply into the issues.
            net neutrality = government control. Thats fine, so long as the government does what it suppose too. However, it is the government that gives ISPs a local monopoly in a lot of cases. Once the government takes greater control of the internet, then there will likely be a tax to cover their expenses (internet tax). What would be ideal is if the technology improves on wireless service, more competitors can enter the market in a given area. They will compete amongst each other, and will be less likely to ***** over their consumers.
            The abortion loop hole can be eliminated as long as there is a federal law that will indict doctors that accept patients out of state.
            Cutting taxes can work, so long as you cut spending too.
          • jollins, on 03/06/2008, -4/+4How is that a reflection of my selfish desires? It's selfish to want to protect the internet from being segregated by the giant telcos? It's selfish to not want abortion legislation to discriminate against the poor?

            Also who has honestly read the entire constitution? What is important is being familiar with what it says, and how it is meant to be interpreted.
          • jollins, on 03/06/2008, -3/+3@Ultrakill
            Thank you for replying to what I said. The problem I see with that view is that while improvements in the wireless spectrum may change the market in the years to come, nationwide wireless is still who knows how far away. Currently only a few companies own the fibers internet data relies on and as long as things remain as they are now, there really isn't much of an opportunity for new competition to make the giant telcos treat the consumer better. Of course the ideal solution is keeping the government out of matters, but in certain cases where lack of government oversight would hurt the flow of common services (as they would here), I think regulation is the lesser of the two evils by far.
          • sw33tsarin, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3"Also who has honestly read the entire constitution? What is important is being familiar with what it says, and how it is meant to be interpreted." Ron Paul aside, I have copies of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Twelve Amendments hanging right above my bed. Having a daily reminder of what this country was founded on is something I appreciate. I'm not tryin to come off as a douche and I apologize if I have, just sayin there are people that read and reread the Constitution often.
        • Corrosionx, on 03/06/2008, -2/+5Voters are never objective. You have no idea how things work.
      • Kurlumbenus, on 03/05/2008, -13/+6When they dig down -en masse- anything even slightly anti-ron paul it makes them seem crazier.
        • stealthc, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2But it's all OK right? Because the Obama freaks do the same thing. They just have the advantage of numbers right now.
      • nathew, on 03/06/2008, -6/+5hypocritical, maybe, but accurate.
    • Player1, on 03/05/2008, -38/+8He's right. Ron Paul's followers are fashionistas and fanatics. Neither of which I would like to run into in a dark alley after a primary.
      • dmjarrington, on 03/05/2008, -0/+9Fashionistas... Did you just pull that out of a hat?
        • FlagrantDrugUse, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Not a hat, a purse.
        • KibibyteBrain, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2That sounds like a Stephan Colbert critique.
      • DefendThyself, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3He is an ass hat, so he has no problem pulling out. He is a Socialist & supports Hillary Obama. Traitor to the Republic that needs to be shot at dawn.
    • ziptnf, on 03/05/2008, -0/+9I'm pretty sure you're referring to the Wu Tang clan.
    • n2dasun, on 03/05/2008, -0/+1Wu-Tang!
    • shedmyskin, on 03/05/2008, -3/+29are you retarded?

      The majority of Ron Paul supporters are libertarians. Do you know what libertarians stand for? They are more non violent than most hippies for goodness sakes...hence RP being the only republican against the war in Iraq.
      • dmjarrington, on 03/05/2008, -9/+3Millitant hippies, lulz
        • KibibyteBrain, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Look up a little outfit called greenpeace sometime. Oh, and the dozens of ROTC offices at colleges that still have big black scars from bombings.
      • Corrosionx, on 03/06/2008, -1/+7Except when we are agressed against. Then I don't care if you have a badge or a hat, I'm shooting back.
    • supermanred, on 03/05/2008, -1/+5You're confusing Ron Paul with Wu Tang Clan
    • bobangitanov2, on 03/05/2008, -13/+3Glad to see all retarded supporters' money ended up being used for what he's been accused for. Just staying in for another term.
      • kaelyiesta, on 03/05/2008, -1/+7You're accusing him of something illegal(congressional funds from campaign funds). Care to back that up with fact? Or do you just do needless insults?
      • sw33tsarin, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Glad to see he hasn't dropped out of the race, which makes your point invalid.
    • sollycardy, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4your right. Not the media, your attacks or anything else will stop the Ron Paul freedom phenomenon. We will carry on marching until freedom is regained and when that day comes even you will be grateful.
    • KibibyteBrain, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Thanks for starting an absurdly off-topic discussion. The supporters for Ron Paul in this case would be his supporters as a US Rep. Frankly, I could see people who would never support this man being the President overwhelmingly supporting his voice in the House, myself included. There is a major lack of diversity in the house overall, and few senior members as most house members with tenure would rather serve in the senate.
      The only real thing of note in terms of his presidential campaign was he was able to successfully run for both offices, which would normally not be an easy thing to do, disregarding the fact he has been relatively silent on the presidential trail as of late. Kucinich, however, might learn that being away from home can create problems with your presumed seat...
  • takua108, on 03/05/2008, -24/+359He'll be in office as long as the Internet's around.
    • nymphetamine, on 03/05/2008, -91/+9Or until he dies. But I'm sure the Paultards would still vote for a dead guy.

      /for the lulz; Vote Quimby!
      • itsthebrod, on 03/05/2008, -1/+23Buried for ending your comment in idiotic 4chan fashion.
    • mythicflux, on 03/05/2008, -7/+194Ron Paul will never die. He'll just merge with the internet to become InterPaul.
      • WhatsUpWithJack, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5The InterPauls are not just some big truck you can dump something on, it's a series of tubes!
      • HunkOfLove, on 03/06/2008, -3/+2I like Interpol.
      • Darksaber11, on 03/06/2008, -0/+7Man... I'm in a ***** mood tonight and that comment just made me laugh out loud. Thanks man. InterPaul 2012!
      • Twisty, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Wow that is the most amazing thing ever dude... epic props to you. hahaha.
      • TheAtomicMoose, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1I prefer ROM Paul
    • kipmartin, on 03/05/2008, -38/+5interesting guy. a dr. who believes in creationism. has a neonazi following, and believes in a JFK conspiracy. id vote for him just on those credentials alone.
      • jaxx751, on 03/05/2008, -22/+4made me laugh out loud. Totally true. I visited his website and his ideas are good when you start reading, but as you continue you realize how crazy this dude really is.
      • GTPilot, on 03/05/2008, -2/+9do you qualify all your decisions based on what neonazi's follow? obama is going through the same thing with support of a radical muslim leader.

        i'm sure you could find a supporter with different ideals than your own with each candidate, so using that 'logic' to make a point is senseless.
      • ljmunz, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2go back to FOX News
    • RandaII, on 03/05/2008, -42/+4Hahaha I been waiting for this moment. ***** you Ron Paul Supporters this is what you ***** get for spamming the Internet with your Ron Paul *****
      • airburst, on 03/05/2008, -6/+19You stupid sheep. You fight anyone with a different opinion. People like you are too easy to herd. Baaaaaah Baaaaaah Baaaaaah.
        Keep up the bleating. Go Obaaaaahma.
        • Amiga500, on 03/05/2008, -8/+1LOL, always everybody but you. You've got a hard on for minority status.
        • misguidedmonkey, on 03/05/2008, -2/+4Not really sheep. More like a school of fish. Kevin Rose changed the algorithm to favor Obama.
          Obama became popular and everyone kinda swam behind their fellow digger.
      • rficwizard, on 03/05/2008, -0/+24Did you understand the article? This is a victory for Ron Paul.
      • JettaMan, on 03/05/2008, -3/+8Randall, you sound like a real rebel. It must be so hard for you to rebel *with* the media establishment. I'm sure you worship Obama right along with the media, yet somehow fool yourself into thinking you are rebelling against the system. Supporting Ron Paul is being a true rebel.
        • FlagrantDrugUse, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Being a true rebel would be taking up arms. Just saying.
      • seadeus, on 03/05/2008, -2/+11Ron Paul supporters are still waiting for a logical or policy based attack on him. Instead we get comments like Randall's. Randall, what is it like living life too afraid to think?
    • TheBogie, on 03/05/2008, -7/+134The country is not ready for a President with balls as big as Ron Paul's.

      The man uses a parachute as a jock strap.
      • BriscoeJr, on 03/05/2008, -9/+3If thats true thats AMAZING.
      • Locke23, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Ron Paul dosn't get wet, the water gets Ron Pauled
        Oh man, Chuck Norris is dead, along came Ron Paul
    • 0Degrees, on 03/05/2008, -3/+48Ron Paul does have gigantic balls. I bet if the Democrats took a lesson from Dr. Paul and stood up to the Bush administration, like he did, we would be a lot better off right now.

      I just don't get why everybody is so pumped to get a Democrat in office when they've done nothing over the past 8 years of any significance to actually do their jobs and cause tension between Congress and the White House.
      • kronso23, on 03/05/2008, -0/+29Because Americans seem to have the idea that your party sums up your beliefs. So when they see 8 years of a republican ***** everything up, they tend to think all republicans are *****-ups. It's that simple.
      • JettaMan, on 03/05/2008, -0/+7If the media is behind Obama (and they are) then I'd say we're in trouble. They are also behind Hillary, and McCain. So we are f*cked. The only one they weren't behind was Paul and to some extent they really didn't like Romney, probably because he is a businessman and not a lawyer.
      • UglieJosh, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I just wish both of them would run for the senate instead. It seems like two people could make a bigger difference there than in the overcrowded congress.
    • JettaMan, on 03/05/2008, -0/+20Notice ABC news was afraid to mention that it was a Ron Paul blowout? He more than doubled his challengers votes. Yet they seem to insinuate in the article it was a close call. Weird. I think the media was hoping he would get knocked off, and in victory they are reluctant to give him his due.
      • FatLoser, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2I'd like to join in on this wankfest, but I'm afraid it's not quite so sinister in reality. Close races are more dramatic and interesting than blowouts. Newspapers want to sell newspapers, tv stations want to sell ads. To do so, they need to keep people interested.
    • waspinator, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Which may not be too long seeing all that's going on with net neutrality.
    • senator32, on 03/06/2008, -1/+9Ron Paul's level-headed thinking will help. I am glad he got his position back.

      See all of Ron Paul's sponsored legislation here: http://www.statesurge.com/members/730 .
      • mngop, on 03/06/2008, -4/+1Level or left heded? The guy is a liberal anyway you look at it
        • redneckblues, on 03/07/2008, -1/+3WTF are you smoking? The man defines conservatism. Unfortunately the neocons have muddied the term.
          • mngop, on 03/10/2008, -2/+1Conservatives don't support killing babies
    • SC4RP, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5The March On DC that is planed for June. Why keep it to our selves? A lot of the Dem's are also fed to the teeth with what is going on. Why can't it be a march for anyone that is sick and tired of power hungry SOB's. They can bring their own signs and we can exchange ideas.
    • Rendonsmug, on 03/06/2008, -3/+2He's a incumbent. What did you think was going to happen, he lose the republican primary?
    • j0313971, on 03/06/2008, -7/+1I've turned on ron paul and no longer support him because i've done my research.
      ron paul is unrealistic, both his vision for america and his electability.
      now that i've learned more about ron paul, i realize how crazy he is.
      i don't see how anyone in their right mind, knowing the facts, could have reelected him.
      • safeshark, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4Care to back up your assertions with ANY evidence at all, j0313971? Seriously, I'm really getting sick of the incessant insults and insinuations with absolutely nothing to back them up. You do much more to help Ron Paul than to hurt him, because the lurkers will become curious as to why there is so much reasonless vitriol directed at him and start to research the issue.

        Also, when were you ever a Ron Paul supporter?
      • DongfangBuBai, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3Care to explain the results of your research? My take on people who say he's crazy is either they will loose their entitlement (stealing from others future) or are afraid to do the right things.
    • mngop, on 03/06/2008, -5/+1probably not since he is 900 years old, he'll be lucky to be alive in November
  • 3ugene, on 03/05/2008, -37/+481Wow, Peden must feel stupid now. 68% to 32%. Bravo. This is what happens when enough people just hear what this guy has to say. It is a shame 75% of the country doesn't even know who Ron Paul is.
    • BenMuldowney74, on 03/05/2008, -4/+105i saw 70% to 29 %... peden was a neocon clown.
    • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -66/+22...Is that why he got less than 15% (and mostly less than 10%) for the presidential nomination in the districts that he represents?

      Give me a break. That "no one knows who he is" excuse stopped working after he was allowed in nearly every debate, and appeared on every single talk/news show that every other candidate did. The reason he didn't gain support is because he didn't appeal to the GOP base. Stop making excuses.
      • mooseontheloose, on 03/05/2008, -12/+56The GOP base is full of neocons and religious zealots. I don't know if I want anybody who appeals to them to be president.
        • RpgActioN, on 03/05/2008, -13/+11Nobody's denying that. onetimer wasn't trying to glorify the Republican base, he was simply explaining why Paul didn't get their nomination.
        • StealthMonkey, on 03/05/2008, -4/+26Let's just all agree that the best thing to do when don't like someone is to call them names.
      • thechr0nic, on 03/05/2008, -7/+29your a ron paul troll.. there is no denying that
        We all know how much you loath and despise Ron Paul... who do you like? do you even vote? Ive never heard you speak of a candidate that you would vote for, perhaps it would make you happy if no-one voted?

        are you simply upset that he was proposing ending all foreign aid including aid to Isreal? I only make that assumption based on your profile picture of the star of David.

        guess we will never know anything from you except how much you hate ron paul
      • PhreakMac, on 03/05/2008, -3/+22Really? because as far as i saw Ron Paul got 1/5th the amount of time if he was lucky.
      • skipdog172, on 03/05/2008, -3/+32You kidding me? Go ask some folks about Ron Paul. Ask 100 people. You'll be blown away when 90% have never heard of him or ever considered looking him up extensively.
        • misguidedmonkey, on 03/05/2008, -1/+5Simply because the media ***** heads kept his name quiet. Most people watch CNN, FOX NBC and believe the ***** they're fed.
      • chrisatwork, on 03/05/2008, -3/+10Do you know who your congressperson is? Thats what I thought.
      • blorc, on 03/05/2008, -1/+15I love the subhead:

        "...but nearly lost his day job."

        How did he "nearly" lose it? Why can't the MSM just report a story about Ron without misrepresenting the facts? He won like 70% of the ***** vote. How is that a near loss?

        ***** assbaskets.
      • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -21/+5@mooseontheloose: I wasn't praising the GOP, as I am not a member. I was just pointing out that his idea's don't fit in line with the ideas of the mainstream GOP

        @theChronic: Thanks for your bigoted assumption. Because I am displaying a symbol of judaism, it MUST be because I am an israeli/zionist who only cares about israeli. Moron

        @phreakMac: As far as pulling stats out of your ass is concerned, he still had enough time that someone interested in his ideas could have done further research.

        @skipdog: More stats out of your ass. Nothing to say here.

        @chrisatwork: Yes, yes I do.

      • PunkRampant, on 03/06/2008, -3/+5I completely agree, onetimer. I supported Ron Paul and hoped his campaign would take off, but I learned that voters just don't like him as a candidate. We saw that in the early primaries and the later ones as well.

        It's not that nobody knows who he is. People may not know him as well as the frontrunners, but everyone I have talked to, who pays any attention to politics, DOES know who Ron Paul is and doesn't like his policies.

        Stop complaining about the "mainstream media" and supposed conspiracies. Next time we need a better candidate who has the same libertarian views but can communicate them more effectively.
    • gamabunta, on 03/05/2008, -47/+9That's because 25% of the country has spam blockers.
      • PlasticMonki, on 03/05/2008, -2/+17Then how has Obama done so well? Oh, my mistake, posting every story about Obama's most current bowel movement doesn't constitute digg-spam.
        • misguidedmonkey, on 03/05/2008, -5/+2Not when Kevin Rose likes the Obama pee pee
    • dsmx, on 03/05/2008, -7/+45What's worse is that most people don't realise what he represents.
      • gungaroo22, on 03/05/2008, -25/+8I think people do, and that's why he's not going to be our President.
        • d03boy, on 03/05/2008, -2/+15I think people make bad assumptions as to what he represents. Instead of looking into why he voted a certain way and asking why, they just assume the worst.
          • dsmx, on 03/05/2008, -3/+12Yeah people just don't get that Ron Paul will vote against anything that increases taxes, increases government regulation or violates the constitution.
          • Rendonsmug, on 03/06/2008, -5/+0Or perhaps people DO get that, but just don't agree with it.
        • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -1/+13Most people don't have the time or inclination to figure out anything as complicated as Ron Paul's reasons for voting against bills which on the exterior look like they might be good for the citizens. I remember several times having to look at why the hell RP voted the way he did, believe me I was upset until I found out every time that inside the bill was some unconstitutional menace. Government and the people attracted to positions of authority are inherently evil and increasing Government power should be ALWAYS restrained.
    • kaelyiesta, on 03/05/2008, -1/+27odd, abc made it out to look like his presidential campaign almost cost him his seat. How is a 36 to 41% gap at all in line with the words they used? It seems rather sensationalist to me.
    • Dantetheinferno, on 03/05/2008, -31/+7I stopped believing in him after i realized what libertarianism is. =|. That'd be scary if he was elected to office.
      • jefferygomer, on 03/05/2008, -1/+27Yup! Because government control is so awesome!
      • Clark3934, on 03/05/2008, -2/+22Yeah, Libertarians scare me with their "personal responsibility" rhetoric.
        ***** that; I like my government nanny.
        • safeshark, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4Yeah! We should be more like China, haven't you heard how wonderful it is to live there? The government is even kind enough to prevent annoyances like Ron Paul from ever reaching the public. They would just throw all his supporters in prison and extract their organs for resale! Isn't total government control wonderful? Who needs Freedom of Speech when you have Correct Speech?
      • Dantetheinferno, on 03/05/2008, -9/+4I was talking more him being against anti-monopoly litigation, against subsidizing research, against having the federal govt. pay for schools, against having any form of oversight over our drugs, etc, etc.
        • logandurand, on 03/06/2008, -2/+12All of those things are not the role of government, which is exactly why I call myself a libertarian.
        • EXreaction, on 03/06/2008, -0/+10None of that should be controlled by the FEDERAL government. There is something called State government you know. What works great in CA won't in TN, so the Federal gov should do little or nothing at all other than keep peace between the states and basic freedoms.
        • rlbond86, on 03/06/2008, -4/+1I agree.
          @EXreaction: First of all, states don't fund research. China is going to catch up to our level of technology unless we fund research.
          Secondly, businesses run across many states. Federal-level laws make things better because (1) businesses can't exploit loopholes in a few states, (2) businesses don't have to worry about harsh laws in some different states, (3) customers in some states would get screwed otherwise.
          Also, national standards for our schools is good too. Do you know that if you become a doctor/lawyer in one state, you might not be able to practice if you move to another state? If we had ways to balance things between states, this wouldn't be a problem.

          Some things are best left to the states, but some states are terrible at managing anything. We would never have public interstates if not for the Interstate Defense Act -- instead Ron Paul would envision a system of private roads. How would you like paying a toll for every road you travel?

          In the end, these things are never all-or-nothing. It's not as black or white as some would suggest. What we really need is someone in charge who would go through the government and clean it up, make it more efficient, and give SOME power to the states and SOME power to the federal government.

          Remember, without your brain, your whole body can't work. Without a CPU, your PC can't work. The Federal Government can hold things together to make the states MORE EFFECTIVE at getting their things done. Unfortunately this administration has done just the opposite; our economy is terrible and most states have budget crises thanks to his party's spendthrift mentality.
      • DaJuggler, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4God forbid anyone think that the Constitution should be followed anymore.
    • jefferygomer, on 03/05/2008, -1/+11What's really weird is how Peden praised his Presidential Candidacy.
    • oxilite, on 03/05/2008, -6/+21When i was in line to vote, i was discussing him with the woman behind me. She said she liked him but he had some crazy ideas. I just shrugged it off, but i SHOULD have said "Yeah our founding fathers WERE crazy!" Damn my slow brain...
    • redlantern64, on 03/05/2008, -24/+21At the risk of being dugg down simply for offering an opinion to the contrary... I heard Ron Paul's message. I didn't agree w/ it. Apparently neither did a lot of people. That's America. Now...you may bury me for daring to hear the message and dissenting.
      • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -6/+9you are probably a socialist or a war monger.
      • pyro789x, on 03/05/2008, -3/+17Buried because you don't speak for the world. Of course he is going to have people who disagree with him, not everybody thinks the government should be run the same way. I still think that the majority of Americans would be the happiest with his way than the way of any of the other candidates, though.
      • Sinnic, on 03/06/2008, -3/+13I won't bury you, but I will ask you to elucidate for us what - exactly - this 'message' was that you 'didn't agree w/'. The emphasis on the primacy of the constitution? The sound money argument? The call for the end of the war in Iraq and a general disengagement from an aggressive, militaristic foreign policy? The end of the war on drugs?

        So, what was it? Be specific.
      • pictureDIGGER, on 03/06/2008, -4/+9I buried you because I disagree with you. That's digg.
      • ictharus, on 03/06/2008, -6/+1I heard his message, I heard the memes - I agree with you.
      • safeshark, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5redlantern, why don't you people ever explain WHY you disagree with Ron Paul?
        Oh, that's right. Because you always end up getting schooled and looking like an ignoramus.
    • zantos420, on 03/05/2008, -3/+21my icon is of me and ron paul in a lone star restaurant, when i geeked like a little girl no one even knew why and when i asked them do they even know who ron paul is, they said "ron who?" ***** the media.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 03/05/2008, -1/+14What's worse for Peden is that he signed a confidential contract that agreed not to compete with Ron Pauls seat while he was going for the presidency. A gross destruction of trust and something that will not soon be forgotten. I don't think it's unsafe to say that he was more than likely coaxed into doing what he did from big money.

      Go Ron Paul! We love you, we love your message, and for those who don't, Hey, in Ron Paul's America, you could continue not supporting him.

      With the march of political fear mongering, it doesn't look like that's going to be the case soon.

      Voting for Ron Paul is a catch 22, I suppose.
    • More4, on 03/06/2008, -15/+2Dr Paul should be more comfortable running for president of the confederacy.
      • DaJuggler, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4What the hell do you base that rediculous comment on?
    • chillybeans27, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5I know what you mean. I canvased a few neighborhoods for Ron Paul before Super Tuesday, and a pretty good percentage of people were very receptive to his ideals, but very few of them knew who he was.
    • Patrikimo, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1If still running when there is a a 40 point spread against, would it be fair to say that RP running for president was stupid? No, because that's democracy. Unfortunately, too many RP supporters seem to think democracy only applies to their candidate.
  • bxblox, on 03/05/2008, -24/+321He needs to help get more like-minded individuals into congress.
    • lvp1138, on 03/05/2008, -4/+76We are working on it...
      • Magillicutti, on 03/05/2008, -7/+5Check out BJ Lawson... or Rick Santoro... or that Terbolizard guy... lol
        • Colindean, on 03/05/2008, -0/+8There's also Murray Sabrin (NJ I think) and Jim Forsythe (NH).

          I'm working on my own political beliefs and studying Paul's in order to solidify a platform for myself in 2010.
    • pbaehr, on 03/05/2008, -1/+51That's not his job, it's ours.
    • orxor, on 03/05/2008, -2/+31... and senate, supreme court and the presidency. Which reminds me http://www.murraysabrin.com/ Ron Paul endorses Murray Sabrin for senate.
    • nakani, on 03/05/2008, -0/+18Here are some other pro-liberty congressional candidates (not copypasta):
      Felix Montez, running for Minnesota State House, District 59A - http://www.felixforhouse.com/
      Jeff Coffey, running for New Hampshire state congress - http://www.jenncoffey.com/
      Greg Lewis, Florida's 8th district - http://www.greglewisforcongress.com/
      Brent Sanders, Louisiana house candidate - http://www.joinsanders.com/
      Alex Merced, New York congress - http://www.myspace.com/mercedforfreedom

      There's a lot more here, apparently: http://ronpaulsacrossamerica.com/
    • Noods, on 03/05/2008, -3/+10Another page for Paul candidates!

      http://www.paulcongress.com/
    • bobangitanov2, on 03/05/2008, -12/+2No, he only cares about gettting re-elected. Face it. Running for president was a cover up so that all the retards send him money. Didn't they realise nobody would vote for him?
      • Trumps, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2dumbass he cant use the presidential money for his congressional campaign.

        friggin tard.
        READ A BOOK!
        READ A BOOK!
        READ A MUHF****N BOOK!
    • eric0213, on 03/05/2008, -7/+1We definitely need more congressmen who attach pork to bills for their home states and then vote against them because they already know the bills have the votes to pass. At least the rest of congress have the balls to vote for the bill after they weigh it down.

      How low can I be dugg?
    • bomb288, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3I didn't see Sabrin mentioned here...I don't know much about him other than that he's running for Senate in NJ and endorsed by Paul.
    • joebonk, on 03/06/2008, -5/+3by like-minded you mean prolife creationists? lawls
    • IMustBeEmo, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4Dennis Kucinich, Ohio Congress
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJcnoDfFWhM
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By_zxa1qnj4
      My Presidential candidates in order are Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, and Ron Paul. Dennis is focusing on Congress right now, and the media has ignored Mike from the start (due to his efforts to end the war in Vietnam, end the draft, and in releasing the Pentagon papers.)
  • Magnolit, on 03/05/2008, -30/+175***** yeah.
  • rozzlapeed, on 03/05/2008, -24/+265I'll be watching for you on C-SPAN, Dr. Paul.
    • moolaismyfriend, on 03/05/2008, -62/+5No you won't
      • bobburn, on 03/05/2008, -5/+24nice trolling there.
        • UnterDenLinden, on 03/06/2008, -9/+1He did it for the lulz.
          He did it for the lulz.
          He did it for the lulz.
  • Kangalanatolian, on 03/05/2008, -21/+190So, I wonder if this is what happens when they use paper ballots, which are stored and counted in public?
    • moolaismyfriend, on 03/05/2008, -89/+15Not it happens when a small very isolated segment of the populace has almost no choice for a small unimportant seat in the House of Representatives.

      What's your next conspiracy question kid?
      • bobburn, on 03/05/2008, -10/+45umm you're a ***** idiot.
        • Pwelborn1, on 03/05/2008, -23/+7No, really... He's not. Most NORMAL people don't walk around screaming about their flaming wild conspiracy theories. It's Digg that has a majority of the idiots in this country. If not just take a look at how far most of them differ from public opinion on just about everything. But hey, at least you guys found each other. How sweet!
        • AAK15, on 03/05/2008, -1/+3lol exactly
        • Bahranzuru, on 03/05/2008, -1/+2Pwelborn1, while I disagree with most, if not all of the major conspiracy theories (even the election fraud ones, despite me being a Ron Paul supporter), saying that they "differ from public opinion" is something people should take pride in. "Public opinion" would say that American Idol is the best television show ever created. "Public opinion" got President Bush into the White House... twice. While I don't go for conspiracy theories, I almost wish I did, just so I could go against "public opinion."
        • cambob76, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Wild conspiracy theories? Do you think the world could be so ***** up while those in power tell us everything truthfully? No, I didn't think so.
        • silveravnt, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1It's no theory. The NH recount proved inaccuracy by DieBold, the same company who has never inaccurately given me money wrong at an ATM. It's a fact. DO you seriously think most Republicans like McCain? Or does it make more sense that Companies with a lot of money make a lot of money on the War and McCain supports the war?
      • PhreakMac, on 03/05/2008, -2/+13So there is not election fraud going on? wow you have your head buried way to far in the sand!
      • funkyloki, on 03/05/2008, -1/+19First, there are no small unimportant seats in our government. Some may be more important than others, but that does not diminish the role of each of our representatives. Second, they did not have "no choice". Paul ran against Chris Peden. Peden apparently, according to "polls" and the media (just google peden paul), was kickin' Paul's ass, leading up to the election, and this is the reason that Paul dropped out of the Presidential race, so he could concentrate on the Congressional campaign for district 14-Texas (all though this might have been a neocon smear tactic...notice I said might). So maybe Janka's comment was right on the money, while you are a *****' idiot. Paul won because his message was clear to the people in his community, AND they used paper ballots. The fact is that leading up to the election, Peden was painted as the forerunner in the polls. Many articles were printed online and in "other media" that stated that the people in Paul's district were "upset" with him over how he "ignores the people in his district". I'm sorry, but if he was that bad, why in the world would they vote him back in, at close to a two-thirds majority? Could it be that maybe the people in his district feel Paul is doing the job they want him to? Think about that, FOO!
  • LeadOffMan, on 03/05/2008, -18/+197would love to see him become the chairman of the republican party. We need his influence desperately
    • moolaismyfriend, on 03/05/2008, -62/+4I couldn't care less who becomes chairmen of a party that perpetuates suffering.
    • AAK15, on 03/05/2008, -18/+2haha yes! then the GOP can become even more of a ***** hole!
    • TheLastFreeMan, on 03/06/2008, -0/+10Would like to see him as Prez, help take out some of the trash in this country.
    • willster580, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5That had never occurred to me, but thinking about it, he could get rid of a lot of the neo-cons that are ruining it. Sadly, the neo-cons also run the party so it's highly unlikely.
  • macwac, on 03/05/2008, -10/+93Congratulations!
    • ncrep, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2its not so much the actual person
      it is the hope for a pure government and one day that person will come along and step into the spotlight just as Dr. Paul
      nice work, and keep fighting the good fight
  • Pherdnut, on 03/05/2008, -104/+20Uh... the fact that there was any serious (i.e. double-digit) challenge to a sitting rep at all is usually a sign that he's got problems and this CRITICAL article takes that as a given rather than spelling it out with small, monosyllabic words for the benefit of RP supporters. It's pretty rare that I actually have to tell the person who originally Dugg the article to RTFS but I guess I shouldn't be surprised given their choice of candidate. If you guys read anything other than conspiracy garbage and Dragonlance, RP wouldn't even be scraping by with 1% of the vote.

    So let me spell this out for you:

    The fact that Ron Paul had to take time from his joke of a campaign to defend his seat in congress isn't a mandate.
    • lnw4151, on 03/05/2008, -10/+4No, I'm well aware that it sucks that he had to really fight for it (I was worried he wouldn't get it back after all this coverage of him showing his district every little opinion of his), and I did read the article, TYVM. Do you think that maybe this once, the article is not a fanatic omg-ron-paul-is-amazing post but rather just...news? And now that Huckabee is gone, RP needs to drop out. And I'll sigh, move on, and go support Obama.
      • Pherdnut, on 03/05/2008, -2/+2Then why would you say this reinforces his message?
      • compdude32, on 03/05/2008, -4/+9Ok so you support RP, yet your second choice is Obama?

        You view on politics can be summed up like this "I want the guy who wants the smallest government, but if I can't have him I want the one who wants the biggest government"

        You really are a *****.
        • w09p, on 03/05/2008, -7/+2And that's just to name one of the huge differences between the two.
          Paulbots don't have a ***** clue about anything they "stand for"... if they did, they wouldn't support the moron.
        • rficwizard, on 03/05/2008, -1/+6How about, I want the guy who least supports the war in Iraq? And that's just to name one issue that could lead someone to support Ron Paul, and to be willing to vote for Obama over McCain.
          • WiseWeasel, on 03/05/2008, -0/+1You could always vote for Ralph Nader... or write Paul in.
          • compdude32, on 03/07/2008, -2/+0Ah so the only thing you care about is the war, and even though the two candidates you support are completely different on every other possible issue you are voting on one issue.

            Well at least I now know that your even stupider than the normal RP supporter.
          • rficwizard, on 03/07/2008, -0/+3@compdude32: You misunderstand, I did not say that I support Obama in any way. I was just pointing out that it is perfectly reasonable for Paul to be someone's first choice, and for them to still favor Obama over McCain. McCain does not agree with Paul on many issues; Obama agrees with Paul on one very important issues, and otherwise mostly disagrees. I can't believe someone who really supported Paul would be PLEASED with Obama or McCain as a choice, but given the choice, it is reasonable that some would choose Obama.
    • airiox, on 03/05/2008, -2/+40Perhaps you are one of the 29% that voted for this other guy. Ron Paul was being attacked from all sides by his own party. 70% approval rate is pretty good considering congress' is hovering in the low 20's. You also don't think that the neocons can't stir up 29% of the vote in their favor with their Karl Rove tactics? A lot of people in this country are pretty dang stupid, if you can't persuade 29% of the population to be swayed your way you yourself are pretty dang stupid.
      • superheroboy, on 03/05/2008, -9/+3I'm a fan of Ron Paul but you're saying he's stupid because he got less than 1% of Americans to be "swayed his way" during the primaries. Make sure to apply your logic to both sides.
        • airiox, on 03/05/2008, -0/+4He got about 6% and that was not a 1 on 1 race with McCain. He was competing with Mitt Romney and more specifically Mike Huckabee for votes. He also had to overcome the slander and being ignored in the media.
    • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -2/+32The republican party is trying to get paul out......which is why the guy ran. It had nothing to do with paul not doing his job. They (neo con republicans) were trying to get the monkey off their backs and failed. Paul is going to get bigger and bigger as time goes on.
      • compdude32, on 03/05/2008, -5/+2Really? He is planing on eating fatty foods.
    • dunderballer, on 03/05/2008, -2/+12We all know that Paul is not a traditional GOP candidate. I would suspect that he would have to defend his seat very hard to pass the republican primaries. His overwhelming majority win against a well-funded traditional GOP candidate is impressive. Even though you "spelled out" your position for those of us less intelligent than you, I still think being elected/reelected to the US Senate takes some effort.
      • Pherdnut, on 03/05/2008, -2/+2Sure but spinning it as a mandate was a bit much and no, nobody spends significant time or money on house rep reelection efforts unless they believe there's serious support for somebody else. It takes a lot more effort on the part of the incumbent to knock a sitting rep out.
    • shedmyskin, on 03/05/2008, -1/+2are you mentally challenged? Its ok if you are. Just wondering. Nothing you said is true or makes a lick of sense.
  • moolaismyfriend, on 03/05/2008, -104/+18Is that where he spent the millions he got from selfish, naive, libertarian, racist supporting, kids?
    • ElAssoWipo, on 03/05/2008, -9/+61HAHAHA, damn those selfish kids who donate millions.
    • airiox, on 03/05/2008, -23/+8I think the one who calls another racist is generally the racist himself. You sound pretty hateful, maybe you should join our cause because apparently we are hate mongers ourselves according to you.

      If you used the word immature I could agree with you there. That is the main reason Ron Paul's candidacy never approached a level a seriousness is because his supporters need to do a bit of growing up.
      • moolaismyfriend, on 03/05/2008, -28/+4I guess you never read his racist newsletters?
        • magoghm, on 03/05/2008, -2/+13I guess you're the only one around here who enjoys reading racist stuff.
        • thechr0nic, on 03/05/2008, -2/+14Yeah I read the newsletters published in his name, by someone other than him.
          why do you recycle this same old debunked *****?
        • Pherdnut, on 03/05/2008, -12/+3No, seriously, have you even heard of them? He's never really apologized for or explained them aside from saying they were written by some staffer who was never fired. They were in HIS NAME. The reason white power folks like him? Partially this, but also because his policies would completely hose minorities.
          • ElAssoWipo, on 03/05/2008, -1/+13He never needed to apologize, they were completely debunked. He was never even remotely affiliated to the peple who wrote them and neither was anyone on his staff. He also spoke about it on tv on two different networks (that I know of).

            Strangely enough, they appeared exactly one week after he announced that he would end all support of Israel.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 03/05/2008, -13/+7I think he suckered some adults too! It wasn't just he kids. I think Obama has the kids in his back pocket.
    • bobburn, on 03/05/2008, -3/+35LMAO. In case you.. well there is no possibility that your ignorant ass did know this: You can't use presidential funds in a congressional race. He raised over a million in about 3 weeks for his Congressional campaign. Selfish 'naive' libertarians? Have you *ever* read anything by Jefferson? Locke? Mill? Von Humboldt? Any of the founders of the philosophy that this nation was founded upon? Seriously, the public school system has failed you and us.
      • moolaismyfriend, on 03/05/2008, -18/+1Hey kid,

        the modern libertarian ideals the racist Ron Paul upholds do not represent those of Locke and Mill. And you're absurd comment is a horrifying glimpse into the utter failure of the American education system.

        Take your selfish libertarian principles and shove it. I happen to want to help my fellow Americans, unlike you kid.
        • chrisatwork, on 03/05/2008, -0/+9Hey kid,

          take your trolling back to LGF.

          We want to help our fellow americans too, kid, help them get their country back from those who'd rather waste billions killing others.
          • noseeme, on 03/05/2008, -0/+2What is LGF?
          • OblivionMage, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Sounds like one of those Scientology words, (ie. SP)
          • thechr0nic, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1@noseeme
            little green footballs
            It is a website, that alot of ron paul hate/trolls comes from.
        • erasedgod, on 03/05/2008, -0/+8Nice, way to ignore the part where he called you on your absolute ignorance. As for selfish libertarianism, you've got to be kidding. How could cutting back the federal government, therefore cutting / eliminating income taxes and putting more money into EVERYONES' pockets be selfish?

          The solution to selfish libertarianism must be generous communism, right? You're a joke.
        • DaJuggler, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Then donate to charity.
      • Rendonsmug, on 03/06/2008, -1/+0Yes I have, thoroughly. And it is on a quite well informed basis that I strongly oppose Ron Paul.
    • DuckofDeath11, on 03/05/2008, -2/+5are you joking?
    • GhostyBoy, on 03/05/2008, -0/+24OMFG RON PAUL IS RACIST?!?!?! I HAD NO IDEA! I'LL STOP SUPPORTING HIM RIGHT AWAY!!!

      Dude, seriously just shut the ***** up. You have to be really ***** stupid to buy into that smear.
    • shedmyskin, on 03/05/2008, -0/+16do you drool on yourself?

      selfish people who donate money......lol wtf?

      Racist? lol....libertarians tend to be less racist the self proclaimed saviors of everyone (democrats)...whose social programs are 80% of the reason minorities are stuck in the situation they are in.
    • OblivionMage, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Don't feed the troll
      • sorepheet, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1DFTT... its tough not to. We want to serve warm truth yet trolls tend to be immune to the truth.
  • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -10/+41I haven't kept up with Paul news lately but I expected him to have a bigger showing in texas.....what gives?
    • brstilson, on 03/05/2008, -2/+24Because the people that elect him every year are a small minority that live in one small Texas district. It is a lot easier to get a seat in the House of Representatives than it is the Senate, especially in a big state that has a lot of seats. The Senate only allows two seats per state, so you have much more intense campaigns for it.
      • seadeus, on 03/05/2008, -0/+8His district is not exactly small. It is bigger than Rhode Island, extending from Corpus Christi to Houston.
    • ElAssoWipo, on 03/05/2008, -3/+36He's anti-war.
      • noseeme, on 03/05/2008, -3/+10The only thing Texans love more then their children is a big bloody war to send them to!
      • mickyji, on 03/05/2008, -0/+13He is anti-unnecessary war
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4Non-Interventionist. Not Isolationist.
      • Tyrghast, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1That's really not fair to the numerous fair-minded people that live here...
    • bdrocker, on 03/05/2008, -1/+17i think people have also given up on him. he hasn't been actively campaigning, and since alot of people won't vote their morals, rather only vote who they think is "electable" he had another poor showing.
      • Jennbkat, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1He has been actively campaigning his ass off! He just wasn't covered by the media AT ALL. In fact many just assumed he quietly dropped out.
    • d03boy, on 03/05/2008, -0/+2I guess people want to "support the party" ...
      • wishninja, on 03/05/2008, -0/+3Yea even if the party has been taken over by liberal globalists.
        • Rendonsmug, on 03/06/2008, -1/+0I wish that were true, because then some good might come out of Washington. Its not like digg made him win the nomination in his district. He's an incumbent. Ron Paul, politics as usual.
    • rvreeland, on 03/05/2008, -0/+5(if we're talking about the presidential primary) People showed up, but there are just a LOT of people and there wasn't a lot of time to spread his platform. He got something like 70,000 votes in Texas, but over a million people voted.
  • macweirdo42, on 03/05/2008, -18/+34Well, good for him. My first thought when he began his presidential campaign was "Don't quit your day job."
  • dunderballer, on 03/05/2008, -7/+88I think Paul's message would be best carried out by his supporters' future involvements in politics. We see a few examples of Paulies running for state and local positions.
    • Jennbkat, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Actually, there are a handful of his supporter's running for congress, as well as state and local. At least...they are here in Texas that is.
    • silveravnt, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I agree. It was totally worth the money I sent. For my money i got at least one candidate who went to all of the debates and talked about freedom and the constitution. That spread the message and pulled alot of people in. I hope we get alot of mini Pauls who we can vote for. I will vote for anyone who has the same beliefs.
  • Heysal, on 03/05/2008, -38/+102The people that he works for like him - unlike the people here in NY that Hitlery works for. Ron Paul is known even by other legislators as honest - Hitlery and Obama have both shown up on the 10 top most corrupted politicians list. If that doesn't say enough.................think about where the Clinton fortune comes from..........and ask if you want another president that is for supporting corporations over the people..........or want to keep corporations like the FED and IRS in control of crashing our economy.
    When you become aware and have had enough of being moved like cattle into the corporate slave pens - then take a look at who the Corporate media and Corporations don't want us to know about.........and Ron Paul stops looking ridiculous real fast. Those of you who think it's foolish for someone to run against the odds - are blindly touting that corporations should run our lives rather than a government who supports your constitution --- the fascism that is growing is on YOUR heads. As things become harder and harder for your fellow citizens look in the mirror and really SEE what you are.
    • alittleroy101, on 03/05/2008, -22/+45Hitlery, huh. Listen, I really don't like her but she's not Hitler. Your not so clever attempt to link the two is insulting to everyone who died at his hands. Go ***** yourself.
      • dezmo, on 03/05/2008, -7/+19were you absent the day that Hitler stopped being a literal person and became a metaphorical symbol?
        • alittleroy101, on 03/05/2008, -7/+10Yes I was. What day was that? How about you tell that to my grandparent's generation, or the sons and daughters of people killed by his actions. I'm sure they'll be very happy to hear it.
          • alittleroy101, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1I don't get it. Can someone please explain how Hillary and Hitler are comparable? Seriously, come up with something decent. I'm waiting you douchebag.
        • Bahranzuru, on 03/05/2008, -2/+11I got a vibe of sarcasm from dezmo, saying that he disagreed with Hitler being a metaphorical symbol. However, he is right. People throw the Hitler card around so much that he pretty much has become a symbol rather than an actual person.
          • alittleroy101, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1blow me hipparchos. You people think that you're clever with "Hitlery". You're not. Keep sucking that thumb.
        • Idiggapony, on 03/05/2008, -4/+2I too got a sarcastic vibe from dezmo.

          Hitler has not become a symbol rather than an actual person. Hitler was an actual person. It is inappropriate and offensive to compare Hillary Clinton to Hitler just because one doesn't like her.
          • alittleroy101, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1@hipparchos
            Ugh just ***** go away. You have no concept of history, and no thirst for knowledge outside of your own self absorbed existence. Go back to mama's tit, and enjoy your basement dwelling existence.
      • jjmckay, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5Hmm.. Sure but in retrospect I think much of Hitler's power was in a kind of blind faith and of following orders to which it seems Hillary seems to want and/or demand. Not sure though. Of course Bush W gets/wants/demands the same.
    • lydecker, on 03/05/2008, -9/+17Wow, he applauds him for honesty, and calls her "Hitlery" in the same sentence... something's wrong with this guy.
    • RetlawST, on 03/05/2008, -10/+21Wait, since when was Obama considered one of the top 10 corrupted politicians? I like Paul enough, but that's grade-a ***** right there.
      • rizzo2008, on 03/05/2008, -1/+18http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announ ...
      • alittleroy101, on 03/05/2008, -4/+4Ha, you're getting dug down for asking for a source. Amazing.
        • axgop, on 03/05/2008, -1/+7Should've asked for SAUCE PLZ
        • rizzo2008, on 03/05/2008, -1/+2um no
        • Moonrider, on 03/05/2008, -1/+4He got dugg down for calling it "grade-a *****" before seeing the source.
        • Rendonsmug, on 03/06/2008, -2/+0Ok then, after seeing the source I am calling it "grade-a *****".
      • Pssdoff, on 03/05/2008, -4/+12WRONG.
        Obama is #8 on the most corrupt list. You fools have deluded yourselves into thinking he is going change something.

        http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announ ...
      • sutherbj, on 03/05/2008, -2/+8Keep in mind that Judicial Watch describes itself as being "conservative"
        • Moonrider, on 03/05/2008, -1/+3So what? Doesn't matter if the organization is conservative or liberal, the facts are the facts. And Judicial Watch is really Libertarian conservative, which means it examines the Constitutionality of issues, politicians' actions, and the candidates' positions, just like Ron Paul does. They are a trustworthy group, regardless their position on the liberal/conservative scale.
        • brad3378, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Keep in mind that there are Republicans AND Democrats on their list.
        • TheSenori, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Which is clearly why the three Republicans they included are either gay or disliked by libertarian conservatives, why they named the entire top Democratic leadership, and why they completely ignored politicians such as Rick Renzi and Ted Stevens who are under *federal investigations* and were, in the case of Renzi, actually *indicted.* If that isn't balance there, I don't know what is.
          • alittleroy101, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Don't tell the Paultards the truth. They can't handle it.
    • Pherdnut, on 03/05/2008, -2/+9Was that the official "10 top most corrupted politicians list?" I'd love to see a link to that.
    • daggah, on 03/05/2008, -8/+4Honest and stupid is still stupid.
      • janeuner, on 03/05/2008, -1/+6Dishonest and stupid is also stupid, and maybe a little bit criminal as well.
      • Moonrider, on 03/05/2008, -2/+3Stupid he is NOT! If you had done ANY reserach on him you would know that. Your comment buried for inaccuracy.
    • Colindean, on 03/05/2008, -2/+3GODWIN'S LAW.
    • DeepFriedFetus, on 03/05/2008, -1/+5You seem to have a lot of anger concerning corporations...the free market is a pillar of Ron Paul's America, you do know that, right?
      • Moonrider, on 03/05/2008, -1/+7Yes, but the situation we have now is NOT a free-market, what we do have is a managed market where the corporations control those who make the laws, to the benefit of the corporations and the detriment of the populace. Ron Paul would put a stop to that and that is why the corporatocracy wouldn't give him any media coverage except that which was derisive and marginalizing, and why the Republican party elite marginalized him.
      • silveravnt, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Yes there is a lot of anger concerning corporations. Thats because citizens have taken a backseat to corporations in Washington's eyes. Politicians don't care about the people they do the bidding of the corporations because they get paid by us no matter what but they only get paid by corporations if they cooperate.
    • OneLess, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2He mentioned fascism! Dugg up!
      Seriously, it's like every Paulista comment is a cliche.
    • x21in2010x, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Still waiting for the source that states that Obama is one of the top ten most 'corrupt politician's'. It doesn't surpise me that Paul's fanbase is economically against Obama's, but at the least you have to respect both for having a genuine campain for America.
      • silveravnt, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Read the thread. Only about 20 people posted the link.
  • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -101/+47Wait, there must be some mistake. I was told by digg six months ago (and as recent as two months ago) that at this point in time paul would have not only Cinched the republican presidential nomination, but would be preparing to wipe the floor with the democrats this november. Are, are you telling me digg was wrong about this guys level of support???
    • dasbush, on 03/05/2008, -8/+13The Internets simply thought that it's own opinion actually applied to people that don't know about digg, et al.
      • magoghm, on 03/05/2008, -3/+7I don't remember anyone here making that claim. I do remember you predicting Ron Paul would drop out of the race about a month ago, and he hasn't dropped out yet :)
        Yes, we know you believe that he should drop out now because "McCain has already won the nomination", but that only proves you haven't understood anything yet.
        • dasbush, on 03/05/2008, -3/+4I don't remember me saying that Ron Paul would drop out (if you can find evidence to the contrary, my memory isn't always up to snuff). I wouldn't doubt if I said that he had no chance of winning. The thing is that digg, et al actually believe he had a chance, implying that either A) The internet support was enough to win -or- B) That his support went beyond the internet. The internets were wrong and I stand by that.
          • magoghm, on 03/05/2008, -1/+4Sorry. By mistake I clicked on the wrong "reply" link. The comment was for onetimer.
          • 3ugene, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1"A) The internet support was enough to win -or- B) That his support went beyond the internet. The internets were wrong and I stand by that."
            Because only Ron Paul supporters on the internet voted for him? I am pretty sure a majority of his votes came from people who aren't regulars on the internet. He only has 19,000 friends here, 50,000(i believe) on MySpace. He probably got about a million votes so far.
        • Pherdnut, on 03/05/2008, -0/+1I wouldn't blame him for assuming even Ron Paul would back out but he probably assumed people would have stopped sending him money by now.
    • Redline500, on 03/05/2008, -15/+75Ron Paul is supported by intelligent people that research the facts and think for themselves. Digg is full of such people. The rest of the US is not.
      • BrandonMills, on 03/05/2008, -12/+16Excuse me? Completely inaccurate stories manage to get on Digg on a daily basis. Digg still has a serious problem with fanboi articles leaping to the frontpage as 'news', where as legitimate news sometimes never even gets reported.

        I see that as more of a self-righteous statement. The fact of the matter is that those who were right about how this entire Ron Paul nomination would turn out were buried by a horde of Ron Paul fanbois that didn't ( and still don't ) want to hear the reality of the situation.
      • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -17/+7Digg is full of intelligent people that think for themselves?

        Ell oh ell.
        • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -3/+9Way to put yourself down man.
        • shedmyskin, on 03/05/2008, -1/+3its cute how onetimer still thinks his vote counts....despite all the proven voting fraud thats rampant all over the country....and no im not some sore loser ron paul supporter...its happening to everyone. Hilary will be the next president, she was chosen a long time ago.
        • metapop, on 03/05/2008, -1/+4onetimer somehow managed to be a digger... the bar must not be that high.
        • mlirblur, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Ron Paul supporters are mostly content with the concept that he will most likely hold onto his House seat and continue to represent the libertarian message in Washington. Ron Paul supporters, with this in mind, are able to be OK with the concept that Ron Paul for President will not happen this year. We're capable of settling for his reelection as a Congressman.

          Yet, Onetimer still remains a d-bag in both scenarios.
      • Daniel591992, on 03/05/2008, -1/+4Ah.. Intelligent people that can't see why online support doesn't translate into votes?
        • Pssdoff, on 03/05/2008, -1/+3Because whole crops of very old religious zealot voters need to start dying off first?
      • daggah, on 03/05/2008, -6/+5If Ron Paul's supporters were intelligent and could think for themselves, they wouldn't support a candidate whose policies are insanely stupid.
      • PunkRampant, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2That was one of the most ridiculous comments I've ever read on here. Congratulations.
    • BuddyDoQ, on 03/05/2008, -3/+33You were also told just yesterday by Digg that Obama was ahead in Texas and Ohio, and that a man should be murdered for killing a puppy dog. The Digg crowd is just that, a crowd. It is not a fair representation of... well anything but what the digg crowd says. To be fair, Paul did very well for a guy that gets nearly zero press, or press that starts with, "Long-shot," or "He's not going to win." Plenty of 3rd and 2nd place finishes, and who knows how many delegates will vote for him at the RNC now that it's just him and McCain.
      • Daniel591992, on 03/05/2008, -5/+4Except that Obama actually had a shot at winning one or even both.
        • BuddyDoQ, on 03/05/2008, -3/+4Everyone on the ballot had a shot at winning. To me, Paul had a much better shot, seeing as he got me to vote for him while Obama did not.
      • shedmyskin, on 03/05/2008, -1/+2btw there are dozens of other videos of soldiers torturing animals and....people.

        They shouldn't be killed, but they should dishonorably discharged asap...then again the military is so desperate for recruits they are going into the prison system so it seems unlikely they will dismiss these people because after all...they are just animals. I mean people torturing animals isn't really that bad of a thing right...its normal everyone does it.....wtf happened to this country.
        • erasedgod, on 03/05/2008, -2/+3"then again the military is so desperate for recruits they are going into the prison system..."

          Source or you're full of *****.
    • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -8/+22There he is! What's a ron paul story without a negative comment from onetimer ........it's nothing! nothing I tell you.
      • thechr0nic, on 03/05/2008, -3/+7ill wait until the entire crew including herk, gets here.
    • noahhoward, on 03/05/2008, -2/+7Yeah I'm happy that we're so ***** too.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 03/05/2008, -2/+4It just can't be! Obviously a conspiracy! I'll get to the bottom of this /*puts on aluminum foil hat*/
    • Trykt, on 03/05/2008, -4/+2So basically you should go ***** yourself.
    • Curlz31, on 03/05/2008, -4/+5Do they give extended lunch breaks for digg users at JP Morgan Chase?
      • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -14/+8Ah, nothing like a little subtle bigotry from a paulbot to finish the afternoon...

        You realize alot of that money paul DOESN'T SPEND when he eventually drops out/the convention arrives will end up in the GOP coffers, which they will use to finance mccain's general election run? Hope you enjoyed donating to McCain by proxy...
        • 2trkpony, on 03/05/2008, -5/+10What are you going to do with your life when all this Ron Paul stuff blows over?
        • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -15/+6Well, unlike you guys, I didn't invest the sum of my life's work and effort for the last year into this campaign, so like I'm doing now, i'll probably just continue surfing digg while I am at work, laughing at people who think they're informed, such as yourselves and the rest of the 9/11 truth movement.

          "What are YOU going to do with your life" is the more relevant question, as it was your cult that invested all their time into this epic failure of a campaign.
        • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -3/+10You just said you didn't invest your life's work into the campaign which is true.....but you did invest your life into disparaging comments in every possible ron paul thread for the last year or so. What does that make you exactly? Paul's movement will continue and he will use up the rest of his money before even thinking of giving it to mccain by proxy. I wouldn't say it's a failure at all. He made his voice heard and the movement is going forward. You can't conquer the minds of everyone in a years time. Do you really think ron paul would give his money back to the GOP?.......You really believe 100% he wont try to spend it all? Come on.

          onetimer I really hope you see things in shades of gray rather than black and white eventually. You criticize the paul supporters (generalizing them as truthers.....which most are not) and you spend a majority of your work day (i.e. 8 hours of your life) arguing with them online. I really dont know which is more pathetic.
        • 2trkpony, on 03/05/2008, -4/+13"Well, unlike you guys, I didn't invest the sum of my life's work and effort for the last year into this campaign"

          assume much?

          You have been proven to 'invest the sum of your life's work', free time, weekends & holidays on Digg doing nothing but infiltrating Ron Paul articles just to type a smear campaign ***** storm in the comment section. That is, when you're not policing for Prison Planet submissions to bury and smear, only to come back moments later and read the comment section, and actively searching 9/11 Truth stories to personally assault 24/7 all the while interacting and dialoging with people you 'hate' just to prove to yourself & posse what a big man you think you are. How do you ever find time to sleep! Certainly their are better "careers" out there for you?

          "i'll probably just continue surfing digg while I am at work, laughing at people who think they're informed"

          'Surfing Digg while I am at work"

          You obviously never get any 'work' done.

          Unless...

          You, informed? Now that's funny! You're a dedicated government apologist, probably a paid one at that. Your only 'informing' is government lies. You parrot the government storyline religiously, without a further critical thought. You have proven yourself to know nothing about what it means to be truly critical, independent, and informed. You are government crime enabler. Your passion is to excuse government lies and attack good people who oppose them. That's not being "informed", it's living a sham.

          "as it was your cult that invested all their time into this epic failure of a campaign."

          There's no cult like your government crime syndicate, eh onetimer?

          This campaign was by no means any sort of "epic failure" as you government crime enabler charlatan stereotypers are so rife to smear.

          What is taking place in America is not about 'Ron Paul'. He is a spokesman but it is ultimately not about Ron Paul. What we are seeing is a desire by the American people to return to good, honest forms of government. Just because Ron Paul will not get elected does not mean that this is the end. As a matter of fact, it’s just the beginning. You seen people have woke up in resurgence to the needs of this country and they are taking action. They have woken up to the fraud that is the Federal Reserve system, NAU, CFR, IRS, imperialism, and the Iraq war sham for profit. That alone is victory in itself, even if he doesn't win presidency. Look at it this way: there are MILLIONS of Ron Paul’s out there getting ready to take their stand against a tyrannical government and a corrupt system. People all over the country are getting out and making their voices heard. Some are running for office. Others are helping those who run for office get elected. Still others are blogging, videoing, calling, protesting, etc. and taking a stand for what’s right, true, and just. Now more than ever before, thanks to Ron Paul : )

          His campaign is labeled "epic failure" only by empty zionist fascist subversives who have no idea the fundamental concepts this great country America was founded upon; concepts of Freedom, Liberty, representative government, power to the people. NOT tyranny, oppression, political crime networks, deceitful, career politicians, and anti-constitutional fascism as you are so fond to prop up, excuse and promote.

          The fact that Ron Paul's message resonated with and woke up millions of people is a victory in itself and provides niche with which to continue the efforts. A supremely powerful message has been broadcast to those who would attempt to enslave us that there will be a huge reaction and that our numbers and influence will only continue to grow, presidential race or no presidential race. As we have said all along - this is not about a political campaign, this is not about 2008 and this is not even about Ron Paul. This is about an idea, an idea that surpasses the transitory nature of a presidential election and one which can not and will not be stopped no matter what the circumstances. It will not end at the Republican convention. It will not end in November. It will only grow stronger with time. This is true victory in every sense of the word.
        • gofalcons, on 03/06/2008, -4/+5wow 2trkpony, that was uber pwnage.
        • onetimer, on 03/06/2008, -8/+4wow 2trkpony, that was uber hyperbole and libel. Looks like someone is still bitter, I can't imagine why?

          Oh wait...
        • 3ugene, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2onetimer doesn't know how to respond because FOX 'News' hasn't ever gotten owned like that. He doesn't know the script yet.
    • onetimer, on 03/05/2008, -17/+6Well looks like this comment section has turned into a good ol' fashion ronpaul-circle-jerk. Just like in olden days...

      I'll leave you guys so that you may continue feeding each others delusions about the "race not being over yet".

      Meanwhile i'll be laughing, and enjoying the fact that I am now vindicated for all the times six months i said not only will paul NOT win the nomination, but he won't win a single state!

      If you're planning to spam digg in 2012 (if old man paul is still alive), then please, please wait at least until he announces his run again.
      • ssn697, on 03/05/2008, -9/+3Alex Jones for Savior!

        Ron Paul for Messiah!!!

        It never ceases to amaze me how invested people become in OTHER people. How they cannot accept flaws or imperfections, even in POLITICIANS. Yet, WE are the sheep...
      • pictureDIGGER, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4Ron Paul 2012!
        Don't leave onetimer! I don't know what the meaning of your wasted life will be without your spin.
      • llamabread, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4You guys said he would never get more than one percent. You said he would never raise any money. You said he would never get double digits. Ron Paul did incredibly well considering he was running as an anti-war, small government conservative in a party that is now pro-war, pro-government.
        • Curlz31, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Don't forget the systematic smears, falsifications and ignoring by the 'mainstream' media and being ridiculed and ganged-up-on by his own party.
  • fac3less, on 03/05/2008, -12/+37Woo! Go Ron Paul :)
    • noseeme, on 03/05/2008, -1/+4Yeah Ron Paul! You can do it!
    • ostracize, on 03/05/2008, -1/+4I like RP too but these comments are up to Huckabee fanboy standards.
    • tidu, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Ron Paul 2012
  • Spoomeister, on 03/05/2008, -4/+59So, how's Dennis doing?
  • RobLiefeld, on 03/05/2008, -72/+14Now that Ronnie Paul got his ass whooped by McCain, I rather he retired. We don't need a racist preaching about the gold standard to us... no country uses the gold standard to determine the value of money... what a kook!
    • Qtip42, on 03/05/2008, -2/+14Mccain is just as old as paul and we don't need mccain's racist preachings either. I'd say something about gold and mccain but we all know he doesn't know how money is created or where value comes from. He leaves that up to other neocons like _____________________________________________________________(fill in the blank)
    • PlasticMonki, on 03/05/2008, -1/+11You're right, we can easily control inflation by throwing even more money into the system without having a commodity to back it up. That will fix everything.
      • Rendonsmug, on 03/06/2008, -2/+0So you would rather artificially inflate the price of the commodity? Gold isn't just a sink of value anymore you know.
    • Trykt, on 03/05/2008, -4/+7Eat a bag of *****.
    • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -0/+11yes gold is crazy, thats why I own it and all you paper boyz can wipe your assets goodbye! Crazy is creating money out of thin air! crazy is giving a private corporation complete control of your money supply, protecting it against competing currencies by arresting anyone who dares not use their monopoly money!
      • synarchy, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Dugg once, but wish I could have dugg 100 times.
    • willbrhs222, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4No country backs their money with gold.
      Wait what about that really good banking country Let me think... Oh right Switzerland
    • SquigglyP, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2What's McCain going to do to improve this country? Before you start throwing stones at Paul, tell me what exactly you think is so great about McCain? The fact that he will just continue the downward spiral this country is on? Business as usual?

      With any luck he'll pick a competent vice president