Ron Paul called the other day and…

Here I am in Krasnodar, Russia.  Toward the end of an around the world speaking tour that took me to six countries and some pretty exotic locales, like Krasnoyarsk, Siberia and now this delightful, warm, little town near Sochi and the Black Sea.

One gets an interesting perspective outside the USA.  And Russia is the best place of all for getting that perspective.  There is so much about Russia that America has dead wrong. And the America media, corrupted by that ignorance, makes no attempt to really understand and get it right.

The opposite is true too, of course.  There is much about America that the Russians get wrong.  And sometimes, in getting it wrong, one could say they are getting it right.  For example, in their experiment in democracy, there are freedoms they have in Russia that are long gone in the USA.  It kind of gives one pause.

And so today, with a day off in between speeches, my mind wandered back to a phone call I got from Congressman Ron Paul.  It was just before I left the country, so I didn’t have time to tell you about it.  But I have been thinking about his campaign and where it goes from here.

The congressman is a pretty classy guy.  He was just calling to say thanks for coming to Minneapolis and speaking at his Campaign for Liberty.

But I asked him, “Are you going to run for president next time?”

After all, everything he ever postulated about the fragility of the American banking system and Keynesian economics is coming true before our eyes.   Indeed, without a whimper or so much as a one hour special on FOX TV the United States socialized its banks.  And this on the watch of a “conservative,” Republican president from Texas.

Ha, they didn’t even invent a new word for “Socialism.”  That’s how fast it happened.  One day we were all led to believe that Ron Paul’s warnings were bogus and absurd and just a rehash of Ross Perot or worse, some anti-communist, right wing kooks from the 60’s, and none of those things would ever happen.  And then the next day, they were openly, blatantly talking about it all in public.  And with no shame whatsoever. It sort of takes your breath away.

On the phone call Ron Paul said something about it being too early to decide, and indeed, it is too early for him to say publicly what he is going to do in 2012.  Who would listen? We are right now celebrating the most popular President-Elect since Andrew Jackson.  But it sure isn’t too early for us to say what we want him to do?  I am going to do my next blog on why Ron Paul should run for president again.  And I would appreciate your thoughts. Maybe he should hear what we think?

Nor is it too early for him to decide privately.  I have been a part of numerous presidential campaigns, in various capacities, and I can tell you that it is a multi-million dollar enterprise and many things take time.  Unlike President-Elect, Barack Obama, it took Richard Nixon 16 years.  Reagan 10 years.  The same for George H. W. Bush who first announced in 1978 but wasn’t elected president until 1988.

Running for president is a bit like building a shopping center.  You may have all the money in the world and you may have all the political connections to get you through zoning boards’ decisions.  But even working 24 hours a day, with big lights making the night day for three shifts of workers, it still takes a little time to build a shopping center.  And there are many things to do when you run for president.  The laws and rules are different, state by state, as the Paulistas learned the hard way.   It is an extreme extravagance to do it only one time. 

That’s why late comers like Fred Thompson in 2008 and Ronald Reagan and John Conally in 1972 and Bill Scranton in 1968, never make it, in spite of positive polls telling them that they can.

And then Ron Paul doesn’t have all the money in the world, nor does he, by the very nature of his populist campaign, have the political connections either.

The point is that Ron Paul was right to tell me he hasn’t decided yet but he sure better tell himself.  He must decide soon.  There is work to be done.  And some of it is done three years out or not at all.  More on this in the next blog.

 

19 Responses to Ron Paul called the other day and…

  1. […] discussing the reasons why Ron Paul should run again. We’ll keep you posted. In the meantime check out Wead’s blog and let him know what you […]

  2. scooterodell says:

    That tidbit about freedoms we no longer have… I’d love to hear you expand on that. Sounds fascinating.

  3. timdyer says:

    Hi, Doug,

    I see your point. Here’s the response I posted on my Campaign for Liberty blog (Tim_D, My Proposal for a Plan to C4L):

    My only problem with “Ron Paul 2012” is that he will be 76 years old. I don’t believe the American public will go for electing a person that age. And, the MSM will have a field day with it. Just look at how they hammered John McCain’s 72 years!

    My own personal opinion – if it’s desired – is that Ron should select, and mentor, a person for whom he’d run as VP or for whom he’d serve in a major Cabinet position.

    Hopefully, the person won’t just be a “clone” – and I don’t mean that disrespectfully to Dr. Paul. I just don’t believe that we need a clone in the Presidency (look where that has brought us!) However, I hope Dr. Paul selects a person with integrity, insight, experience, and enormous energy for doing what’s right – some of the same qualities that Dr. Paul has exemplified himself.

    I believe that all of Dr. Paul’s admirers would recognize the necessity of such a selection – and would be all the more responsive to the campaign which would ensue.

    Another aspect is one we’ve looked at pretty closely on this thread – would he run as Republican? Won’t work (see above). Would he run as Libertarian, Constitution Party, etc? Won’t work.

    The only feasible (in my opinion and I think quite a few others) approach is to create a Party who’s sole purpose is to challenge, supplant, and eradicate the current Republican Party superstructure.

    We do it with Stadiums when they don’t work any more – why not with a disfunctional political party?

    Anyway, Doug, the network of support needs to be established in order for any Constitutional-minded candidate to have a chance. And that means that people need to be educated.

    Doug, please visit the blog mentioned above and read the many insightful comments, and give your perspective. It will be welcome. You’re right – the time is short, and the time is now or never.

    Thanks,
    Tim

  4. […] Doug Wead blogs about his phone call with Ron Paul and the 2012 election http://dougwead.wordpress… […]

  5. understudy says:

    He should run, but his age will be made an issue—even though at 77 (on election day 2012) he’ll likely be healthier than John McCain was at 57.

    One of the biggest problems in his 2008 campaign was that he entered late. Had he planned much earlier, as you suggest, he certainly would have done even better.

    But, he must allow a good writer to assist him in his speeches. When I talked to his Communications Director, I was told that he insists on writing his speeches unaided. This is unfortunate. His content is not the issue, but he must allow someone to help him with his delivery.

    _

  6. David Black says:

    Please realize, Doug, that the perspective of a tourist or a guest is much different than that of a person who is forced to live in a particular country and therefore limited to subsist without all the luxuries of a well heeled tourist.

    Try living in Russia as a commoner for a few months and then report how wonderful it is.

    So wonderful that it leads the world in alcoholism. Remember that.

    By the way, Ron Paul still is, and always will be, a whack job and a loser as a presidential candidate.

    I would have thought that witnessing firsthand the pothead brigade gathered at that low rent tent meeting in Minneapolis this past summer would have proven it to you.

    And by the way, it took Nixon far less than 16 years to amass the momentum to take the White House. He missed it by a hair in 1960 and won it just eight years later.

  7. heavystarch says:

    davey –

    Being a tourist does NOT make one blind to the poverty and hardship present in Russian countries nor does it make one oblivious to the misconceptions Americans have about Russia. Travel opened Doug’s eyes regarding long held misconceptions on both sides.

    Whack job. Loser as a presidential candidate. Pothead brigade.
    Did you forget the tinfoil hat club? Or perhaps the Paultards?

    Why is it when someone (davey black) can’t handle philosophical debate, they (davey black) reverts to name calling?

    I went to your blog davey and read up on some of your stuff. I didn’t see any substantive arguments – just more name calling, shallow commentary, and superficial analysis that requires nothing more than you catching some sound bites from Faux news, CNN, et al and perhaps some banter between you and your polisci T.A.

    Your insight is lacking. Your study of history is apalling (or lack thereof). Your analysis of topics is weak at best. Your one sided opinions are trivial and meaningless without having studied other viewpoints (and I don’t mean the casual you watched Hannity and Colmes episode to teach you about the “other sides” view).

    I won’t be back to your blog davey. Utter waste of time.

    Doug –

    your blog is always insightful and shows a considerable amount of effort on your part to dig to the bottom of an issue. I will keep coming back here for generally good reading. ^_^

  8. mtabor1 says:

    Doug,

    good post, despite what others have to say.

    Does it make sense for someone to run, when they would be 76 at inauguration time? That would be a major obstacle, just because of the way people think today.

    What would change the many roadblocks Ron Paul and his campaign had to deal with (media “fraud”, real voting fraud orchestrated by the RNC and the party’s leadership)?
    It’s the establishment fighting with all its tricks against those that would endanger it. Today that establishment has been subverted by the neo-cons (just look at the faces around our President elect), and they will not let their goals be thwarted so easily.

    One need only see the campaing of a true conservative like Bob Conley in SC. The neo-cons got their man, Graham, and the Democrats endorsed the Republican candidate against “their” own man. Even the Christian right went for the neo-con, though all the principles that they (claim to) espouse were supported by Conley, not Graham. Perhaps they are just ignorant or stupid, but perhaps they are also just corrupt?

    The only hope is that the neo-cons, in whatever guise (Democrat, Republican, whatever), overplay their hand in hubris so great as to bring them down. It would not be their first time in history. Unfortunately, their downfall might be the end of the host they leech from too.

    So, I think Ron Paul should try it, if he thinks he can fidn a way to improve the transmission of the message, and if he can find a way to overcome the blatant fraud in his party against him. If not, then it will not work next time around.

    I don’t see how Ron Paul can overcome that neo-conned juggernaut in four years. Thus, woudl it not be another failed attempt?

  9. David Black says:

    dear “heavystarch” (or whatever your user nym is today, likely different from yesterday or even last week. The blatant asskissing gives you away):

    So how much does Doug pay you to fight his battles for him?

    I’m sorry, I’m not finding any “philosophy” worth “debating” with Israeli hating isolationist paleo-cons and pothead Losertarians.

    You are too cowardly to view history in the harshest possible light. You are even too cowardly to view your fellow citizens in the same light.

    What morons like you are seeking is agreement with and validation for your insane and antiquated political views. You post to Wead’s blog for safe haven, not to to have your views assaulted and trashed by a “blasphemer” like me.

    I am happy to play the “Satan” incarnate role among a bunch of idiotic holy roller types who approach their political views with the same piety and reverence as they do their Christianity and devotion to morons who swindle money in exchange for salvation.

    if you back a loser like Ron Paul you are equally a loser. Anyone that backs a candidate that has such a devoted following of brain dead pot heads can’t be respected by any decent human being that leads a clean and sober life free of scandal and disgrace.

    John McCain did not attract pot heads, thankfully.

    That’s right, I’m more perfect than you. A person is judged by the company they keep and what they do in private when no one is watching.

    So suck on that.

  10. jomel77 says:

    Ron Paul should make another run and start ASAP. There is simply no one else out there that compares with his record of voting with the law of the land that every elected official swears to perserve, protect, and defend.

    Suggestion: Hire a speech coach that will train Dr. Paul how to talk to the dumbed-down masses. I’m not talking rhetoric like the puppets. Keep the message intact but in emotion-filled bit-sized nuggets. Also hire an experienced rally coordinator that will make the speechs party-like with smiling happy faces behind and just in front of him. Throw in some balloons. To be seen as a viable candidate, he has to play that game. When in Rome…

    heavystarch – Here’s the answer to your question:

    “Bad names have played a tremendously powerful role in the history of the world and in our own individual development. They have ruined reputations, stirred men and women to outstanding accomplishments, sent others to prison cells, and made men mad enough to enter battle and slaughter their fellowmen. They have been and are applied to other people, groups, gangs, tribes, colleges, political parties, neighborhoods, states, sections of the country, nations, and races.” (Institute for Propaganda Analysis, 1938)

    The name-calling technique links a person, or idea, to a negative symbol. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence.

    The most obvious type of name calling involves bad names. For example, consider the following:

    whack job
    loser
    pothead brigade
    morans
    insane
    idiotic holy roller
    brain dead

  11. phippscm says:

    Ron Paul 2012! I love it.

    But i am also very interested as well about those freedoms you mentioned?

  12. cbsure says:

    (…RONPAULICANS: TEARS OF VICTORY…)

    Dear Doug,

    There is something wrong with us today if We NEED Ron Paul to be our President. If our strongest defender of Liberty is a 73-year old man…If We have not the courage to give up our seats…to Stand Up in his place…then surely we do not deserve Liberty.

    There was a time when People were oppressed to the point that they were willing to cross an ocean…to find Liberty! They dared to test whether God had blessed them with the potential to survive on their own…away from the tyranny of Royalty & corrupt Religious rulings. So they crossed the ocean…to stare down at Death…to worship…to prosper…& to one day thrive. In doing so they must have found a God so Great…it could not be contained by pages of any book…because they began to see for themselves a world through the eyes of God.

    Time, whether 200 years or 2000 years or 2 billion years old, is a mere blink of an eye. & They saw clearly the nature of Humanity when we reached a state of Power. Away from the din of Europe they realized…We TOO will fight wars by squeezing our pockets to fund our OWN bloodshed. We TOO will persecute ourselves that dare to deviate from our OWN Godly myopic ways. We TOO will force taxes upon ourselves by appealing to our OWN needs…with guarantees of education & jobs & health & welfare & most of all Security.

    & The People of this new nation…that were just here yesterday…rose up to the calling of this Epiphany. We promised to fight No wars unless to defend our People & our Land. We promised to recognize that God speaks to each of us as Individuals…so we learned the importance of keeping our myopic views to ourselves. & Surely we will NOT promise anything that can only be guaranteed by God alone!

    The American Revolution was more than a war for Taxation with Representation. It was the calling of our Liberty from the arrogance of Inhumanity. For too long Humanity was herded by human institutions that claimed to be our rightful Higher Authority…they claim to know Right from Wrong…when in fact every Individual (…be they Royalty or Runts…Popes or Paupers…) will be on the same line to be judged by the same God by the same standard.

    Even those that do not see or believe or pray to God…Make no mistake: We know not who is better or worse…for that is not our judgment to pass. Heaven was not deemed to be a magazine that People can subscribe to. It was deemed to be a Prize for a resume of Good deeds.

    America was born from this Epiphany. & Right from the beginning we were not shining very well. We enslaved People of another nation for sinful profit. We suppressed our feminine voices by pampering them with homely chores. We schemed to take from the Natives what was rightfully theirs. & We changed…sometimes for the better…other times for the worse.

    Ron Paul does not want to be President. He instinctively stands up in the name of Liberty as moral Americans should. But he would be as happy…if not happier…watching someone else to be President. His tears of Victory does not entail the Presidential oath. Rather his success is wrapped in our ability to remember…that the American Revolution never ended.

    The day the British Empire relented…was only the beginning. & Here we are…a blink of an eye later…we already forgotten why we’re here.

  13. David Black says:

    “Suggestion: Hire a speech coach that will train Dr. Paul how to talk to the dumbed-down masses.”

    Representing the people of Texas, he should already know how to “talk to the dumbed down masses.”

  14. […] Ron Paul called the other day and… Here I am in Krasnodar, Russia.  Toward the end of an around the world speaking tour that took me to six countries and […] […]

  15. davide7 says:

    If only Ron Paul could get together with Mike Huckabee, they could make a winning team. Paul will be too old to run for President in four years and he is not charismatic. But he has excellent ideas, Huckabee is bright enough to absorb them, and would do a better job of selling them to the American people. It may seem like a silly idea, but think about it.

  16. David Black says:

    Mike Huckabee has about as much chance as you or I.

    Get this through your heads, people … the future of the GOP is NOT with old white guys!

  17. joshuasmith371 says:

    @ David Black

    “if you back a loser like Ron Paul you are equally a loser. Anyone that backs a candidate that has such a devoted following of brain dead pot heads can’t be respected by any decent human being that leads a clean and sober life free of scandal and disgrace.

    John McCain did not attract pot heads, thankfully.

    That’s right, I’m more perfect than you. A person is judged by the company they keep and what they do in private when no one is watching.

    So suck on that.”

    You are such a disillusioned piece of shit i had to waste my time responding to your garbage.

    What makes you think you are better then someone that smokes marijuana (coming from a college student who doesn’t). It’s not morally reprehensible according to any moral code i have seen. It is possibly better, at the very least very similar to alcohol, in the seriousness of its affects on the brain. Do you drink? If you do neither i would say that is rather impressive, although neither is disgraceful.

    On the other hand, i, along with all civilized people in the world, would agree the hate and morally reprehensible language you use is very disgraceful. While you attack me for being disgraceful for something i don’t even do (as a ron paul supporter), your very posts on this board prove you are uncivilized, and unfit to live in any society except one filled with the hate you espouse.

    And out of competitiveness, finally, i would like to say that no, you are not more perfect then me. I have a 3.8 at one of the top public colleges in the country. Further I already have connections and the money, to go to one of the top grad schools after i graduate. I also have a very large contingent of friends, of the majority who will be just as successful as me in whichever country and society we wish to live in. As for me i hope it is the United States, but if it is taken over by people like you, the far left, or anyone that wishes to control my life, ill just take my productivity and wealth elsewhere, leaving you in the mess you have created. (Unfortunately, as much as i love my country, any sane person by now would realize the new economic sphere of influence is Asia).

    So what makes you so perfect? The fact that you contribute nothing but hate and non productivity to our society? By helping us progress backwards as a country?

    I on the other hand think being perfect is impossible, but for the sake of argument, if it was possible it would be how much you can contribute to society and our world in general. The ultimate goal of life is happiness, and to the extent you achieve this for yourself, your family, your society ,and others, is the perfection most moral, and sane people strive for.

  18. David Black says:

    What a shame that the only only real accomplishment you can claim in life is a 3.8 GPA.

    Go out and live in this dung heap of a world for a while and a take some punches and kicks for a few years and learn what it’s all about.

    I am more more “perfect’ that YOU because I can see and accept the world for what it is, not for what I hope it could be like.

    I also don’t give a fat rat’s behind for anyone but my own flesh and blood. I ask for no help from strangers and offer none in return.

    If you think I’m far left, you must be smoking something. I don’t define being conservative by supporting a pro-illegal drug and and anti-Israeli kook from Texas.

    I also don’t define being conservative by being a stingy cheap skate with money, either.

  19. David Black says:

    joshuasmith: obviously, even with a 3.8 GPA, you don’t see the irony of using the term “POS” while accusing me of employing “morally reprehensible language” in the very same post.

    Just another example why public schools and university educations are wastes of money.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: