[2ndDivisionVet]

"..authoritarian war mongers" Yeah, that fair and balanced reporting we've come to know and love.

[elhombrelibre]

Yeah, very objective.

[vetsvette]

I’d never vote for Ron Paul as President, but I do love having him in the race.

[jveritas]

Ron Paul’s Impact on The Election

Absolute ZERO.

[ejonesie22]

When I first saw this title, why was the first thing popped in my head that old joke about “What’s the last thing that goes through a bugs mind before he hits a windshield”

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

BUMP

[elkfersupper]

Ron Paul’s effect on the election is to point out that there is one small-government conservative running.

[elhombrelibre]

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/19/trutheriness-and-ron-paul/

[longtermmemmory]

Ron Paul’s impact is non-existant.

He is an irrelevant expelling of gas which only the DBM has taken note outside the internet and then only for an effort to construct the illusion of “division in the ranks”.

[jrooney]

Any thread with Ron Paul should be titled a Major Barf Alert. ;)

[AmericanInTokyo]

....is a “semi-barf alert” kinda’ like when the vomitus comes half the way up and then kinda’ goes back down due to reverse peristalsys?

[Grunthor]

“Yesterday I looked at the Ron Paul phenomenon”

Right off the bat this story is in trouble. I think to reach “phenomenon” status, one must actually REGISTER support in polls. Usually a number big enough that you aren’t sharing 5% with 4 other candidates.

[Clintonfatigued]

The only reason Ron Paul is getting so much ink is because he has embraced “blame America” rhetoric in his foreign policy speeches. That viewpoint does not reflect the overwhelming majority of Libertarians.

[George W. Bush]

Nice to see so much warm support here for Ron Paul.

[NeoCaveman]

Whether the Democrats can become a majority party will depend partially on whether they can attract a portion of these voters. To do so will mean not only opposing the war but showing they recognize that the 2000’s are not the 1930’s and their old New Deal coalition is long gone.

To the Dems it's always the 1930's, so the answer is no on that one.

[new yorker 77]

Ron Paul is the perfect example of why terrorists think they can get away with killing Americans.

He is a feckless wimp who has allied himself with Osama Bin Laden.

Ron Paul is a traitor to his country.

[PLMerite]

I think we should limit stuff about Ron Paul to a “giggle alert” only. Honestly his chances aren’t worth a good dry heave.

[NCSteve]

The author is a moron.

People who don’t normally participate in partisan politics, or even those who do but have never been Republicans, are supporting Ron Paul because he is an alternative to the garbage that both parties usually front. So why on Earth would those people suddenly become enamored of the very junk they are protesting by supporting Dr. Paul?

The answer to the author’s problem is that he places a higher value on his political party affiliation than he does on the fate of our republic. In short, he is part of the problem.

To those who would vehemently oppose a Giuliani, a McCain, a Romney, or even a Thompson, but who will turn around and vote for the object of their ire, I say this: Look to your own soul. You are only lying to yourself.

[ObadiahLynch]

“”..authoritarian war mongers” Yeah, that fair and balanced reporting we’ve come to know and love.”

Well you got to admit, we do have a fair share of them lately. They lost us Congress, last time around. Maybe they should rethink what they’re really accomplishing.