Opinion L.A.

Observations and provocations
from The Times' Opinion staff

« Previous Post | Opinion L.A. Home | Next Post »

Ron Paul: Who cares that he's seeking the Republican nomination?

Ron Paul

Texas Rep. Ron Paul announced his presidential bid Friday morning. He ran in 1988 and 2008. Will the third time be a charm? Libertarians hope so. But while Paul certainly has a devoted fan base, in the big picture, will anyone else care?

Patriotic Americans won't

As for Ron Paul as a candidate, my only regret is that debate organizers will probably once again give this hypocritical anti-American crank a platform. The party’s image will doubtless be harmed by giving this fool a podium and television time so that he can explain why wikileaks is awesome, Chinese totalitarians are the in thing with the kids these days, and what the Federal government needs is more earmarks (but only for stuff expressly authorized by the Constitution like shrimp marketing research). I am 100% confident that given the opportunity Ron Paul will be complaining in no time about Bin Laden’s death on national TV because of some half-cocked constitutional theory that Ron Paul will selectively use to mask the fact that, at bottom, Ron Paul is an ally of the enemies of America.

--Leon H. Wolf, Red State

The "tea party" won't

In a word, nonsense. Paul's beliefs about the role of government do overlap to some extent with Tea Party principles. But anyone who cared to listen to him during last week’s first Republican presidential debate in South Carolina quickly understood that the Texas congressman, and his fans, aren't exactly in sync with the Republican Party or any other party, including the one named Tea.

--Jonathan S. Tobin, Commentary

People with first-rate values won't

Paul was the only candidate at the debate to make news, calling for the repeal of laws against prostitution, cocaine and heroin. The freedom to use drugs, he argued, is equivalent to the freedom of people to "practice their religion and say their prayers." Liberty must be defended "across the board." "It is amazing that we want freedom to pick our future in a spiritual way," he said, "but not when it comes to our personal habits." […]

In determining who is a "major" candidate for president, let's begin here. Those who support the legalization of heroin while mocking addicts are marginal. It is difficult to be a first-tier candidate while holding second-rate values.

--Michael Gerson, Washington Post

Ageists won't

Here's why Paul has absolutely no chance of ever becoming president: Americans were not ready to vote for a 72-year-old President McCain in 2008, so they're sure not ready to vote for a 77-year-old President Paul in 2012. 

--Andrew Malcom, Los Angeles Times

Republican voters probably won't…

Those who back Paul were certainly buoyed by a shock poll from CNN last week that showed Paul running better against President Obama than any other GOP candidate.

The problem, though, is that Paul is not running in a Libertarian primary. He has to win the support of Republican voters, many of whom have expressed coolness toward his rigorously anti-war, isolationist foreign-policy views.

--Christian Science Monitor editorial

…though, we shouldn't discount mainstream Republicans

Leaving Afghanistan would've been heresy to Republicans in 2008. Today, it may sound like common sense -- especially after bin Laden was killed in Pakistan, where America is not formally at war, and where he successfully hid for at least five years.

With the debt and deficit several times larger now than they were in 2008, mainstream Republicans may come around to Paul's positions on Iraq (leave), Libya (shouldn't have gone in), foreign aid (end it), and the defense budget (cut it).

--Justin Miller, the Atlantic


Raj Rajaratnam: The feeble defense of an insecure billionaire

Returning to the torture debate

Rethinking victory in Abbottabad in Osama bin Laden's favor

Reactions to Osama bin Laden's death

Donald Trump: A 'blowhard' -- and just what conservatives are craving

--Alexandra Le Tellier

Photo: U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) waits for a television interview at a campaign stop in Exeter, N.H., on May 13 after announcing his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination earlier in the day. Credit: Brian Snyder / Reuters


Comments () | Archives (555)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mary Alice

There are people who care. They were busy spamming comments on the White House Facebook page while everyone else was speculating about what statement President Obama was going to make; then commenting on the death of bin Laden when media broke the news prior to the statement.

The Paul supporters were fond of typing his name three in a row, with 2012, before or after, 3 lines deep, repeated every few minutes. Quite sure they were also the ones who would post NWO, New World Order, Illuminati, over and over again with lots of exclamation points, often using all caps.

Those that support Paul were like an infestation of bedbugs during the previous primary election and can be seen commenting, ever since, on just about any article, opinion piece, blog post that has to do with politics.


at least he's his own man, and not a puppet for the rich..he's got my vote...


I think Ron Paul is the only candidate George Carlin would've have ever voted for.

jim g

Its precisly because he isn't in line with the republican status quo that he has my vote.


Ron Paul has my vote! Shows how little people have focused on our economy or country as a whole. We are in for some serious troubles if our Federal Government continues to expand. We have lived our lives as drones in this country; being told what to do, how to act and how to live our lives. I have always been a Democrat, now I have no party affiliation and am looking for real change.


Real Hope

The rEVOLution is here! Ron Paul 2012


Newspapers and other MSM have a strong pro-government bias. This is because they're owned by corporations who have strong ties to the federal government and a strong financial interest in keeping the big government gravy train rolling.

They hire people to write for them who share this bias. Michael Gerson, whom you cite above, was a former Bush speechwriter. Tobin is the editor of Commentary, which proudly describes itself as neoconservative, i.e. big government. The others are similar. You present them as if they're these disparate voices coming together in unanimous condemnation of Ron Paul, but they're not. They're all DC insiders who make lots of money off wars, banker bailouts and corrupt contracting. Presenting them as anything but a chorus of very interested parties is disingenuous.

Ron Paul 2012, enough is enough.


LOL! I love this list of jernolist with theyr reasons why Nobody will vote for Ron Paul.. This is the reason why i will..

tim gallien

I will


Who cares that Ron Paul is seeking the republican nomination? Intelligent, forward thinking, ethical, constitutionally minded Americans, that's who cares. People who are sick and tired of corruption in Washington. The government is run by lobbyists and Wall Street. Ron Paul isn’t of that ilk. As a congressman over the last thirty years Ron Paul has voted NO on every tax increase that has amounted to our present 14 trillion dollar defect. I care that he's running. Screw what journalists and other politicos think. It’s the average American that counts. Ron Paul is one of us, not one of the cronies that are in the hands of the bankers the planetary elite that got us into this mess.


The disconnect between the MSM and the American people grows...


You will be finding out soon enough, who cares.

Naysayers that even like Dr Paul's message so often say things like, "he's unelectable, he'll never be president" etc etc. Well if you don't play the lottery cannot possible win and if don't vote for him then yes, he can't win. How elementary can it be.

Here is the only delima I have about Dr Paul winning the Pres. election. The "powers that be" will quite possible sabotage his administration. Sabotage every move... bring it all down, then whoever else can come along and say, "see I told you so". "I told you his polocies were wacko." He would need as much or more support from his supporters AFTER being elected than before.


stupid editorials like this are why i cancelled this rag. fortunately your influence over the masses is dwindling. seeing a debate between ron paul and barry hussein soetero, will be a dream come true. GO RON GO!!!!


I care. I'll be voting for him this time around. Guess what? I voted for Obama last time. I'm in the military as well. Does that throw your boxes or what?


I'm a Republican and I support Ron Paul. I sound like I'm standing up at an addict's meeting. :P But seriously, Ron Paul 2012.


More juvenile pap from the LA Times. This is the level of "journalism" you'd find in a high school newspaper. "who cares", "who's popular", "who's going to the prom with Jenny"...

How about we have a real discussion about Ron Paul's platform? How about we have some real discussions about the very real issues facing this country?

The standard raft of Republicanoids that the GOP will put forward will have zero new ideas. Oh sure, they'll make some passing references to cutting spending and then they'll go back to striking the fear of muslims and gays into the hearts of their base. Then we'll end up with Obama or another phony conservative that may as well be Obama's running mate.

We can't have more of the same people!

If you care about your country you better make damn sure you understand what Ron Paul is about before you dismiss him. Read his book.


It is obvious they wouldn't like a Laissez-Faire Liberal. People who prefer centralized power do not want that power to be decentralized back to the states and local communities.

He may legalize drugs but that doesn't mean that the State governments will follow suit. He is advocating decentralization of power instead of maintaining the Plutocracy. It goes against Fabian Socialism/centrism/Corporatism/Social Democracy/Third way (whatever you want to call it). Laissez Faire Liberalism is despised. It is no wonder that Ron Paul with his Austrian Economics, his Laissez-Faire Liberalism, and his Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy is rejected by those who most profit from the current arrangement.

His ideas will win after the crash of the American Dollar.


Patriotic Americans certainly care. Ron Paul has my vote.

Victory for Liberty

I only visited this page to announce I will tell everyone I know to stop buying The Los Angeles Times and disparage them whenever I hear or see someone cite one of the articles. Up yours LAT.


I am voting for Ron Paul.


This is a joke, right?

L Mc

Hmm. Anti-IRS, wants us out of the world police business, thinks grown-ups should be able to make their own decisions about what they put into their bodies, wants a dollar that is backed by something, and has an unblemished record in supporting the Constitution of the United States. Sounds like a radical to me! He's got my vote!


Who cares about Ron Paul running? Human beings who believe that you should not disproportionately jail young black males for non violent drugs violations. Human beings who believe it is wrong to invade and bomb third world countries. Human beings who believe it is wrong to force americans to pay interest to a private banking cartel when the document that establishes us a nation says congress can print money interest free.

"I always win." - Ron Paul

L.A. Times-You lose.


I guess Mary Alice would call this "spamming."


This is an interesting approach to a smear piece, instead of creating something original, the author created a collection of smear pieces from different people and used the main quotes from each. So this is it guys, Ron Paul just announced today, and this is the best they can do so far to discredit him.


Ron Paul is a true iconoclast. He will overcome, one way or another.


I'm never reading the L.A Times again. and if the CEO is reading this YOU SHOULD FIRE THIS GUY. Obviously this guy did no research before writing this article and spoke directly from his heart. I thought journalism was supposed to be an indepth, bipartisan view on a topic with a tad person insight. Not someones blog post.

Ron Paul 2012. let's do this!


More anc more it seems journalists and media are biased and against Ron Paul. How pathetic.

Today Michael Medved, in Seattle, criticized the man for his position regarding Osama raid. Ron Paul is the only candidate who had the courage to recognized the following:
Obama got lucky in that Bin Laden raid. Yes, that is it. Obama can do that type of high risk decision because he is just a tool.


I do not care if I agree with Ron Pauls stance on every issue, I care that he votes the way he says he is going to vote. Ron Paul does what he says he is going to do. Show me one other politician that has a track record like Ron Pauls!


Born and raised in LA. I do well in business and have an MBA. I can think for myself and do my own research. I'm no anarchist and I don't relate well with either party. I like logic and smart idea's. Ron Paul has both. Thanks for confirming why I don't have the LA Times coming to my door every morning anymore.


This is my second comment here, and my last one - I'm not trying to spam the board, but there might be a few fallacies in your points above you're not aware of.
1. I didn't vote for McCain when he ran because I looked closely at his military record. I was disgusted with it. Yes, he was a POW, but the time he spent not being a POW reflected badly in how he conducted himself and took care of the resources in his care. Then I looked at how he was with his issues, and he had kept flip flopping - namely, the number one lesson he should have learned as a POW about torture - he said he didn't believe in it yet wouldn't stand up for his principles. It wasn't his age.
2. I still don't understand your theories on fiscal policy - I'm not sure you have it all together, if you know what I mean. Money reflects an amount of finite resources, and thus is also a finite resource. Simply moving resources around more quickly doesn't change that, especially since energy is also a finite resource. There is a limit to how much debt you can take on without complete collapse - something we will all soon find out.
3. We have some serious issues we aren't facing up to on immigration. Everyone wants to eat, but have you ever seen what happens when the people who own the fields do their absolute best to hire non-illegals? The jobs don't get filled. If we want our crops picked, we need those people who are willing to do so. Do you want to eat?
4. We have more issues on drugs. In order to move them, you have to use trucks, planes, move a lot of money through banks, etc. Yet, what we have is crack down on the little guy who buys them. You can't tell me that the war on drugs isn't a complete farce and that it's not making a ton of money for our government at some level. All you would have to do is legalize drugs and most of our more serious problems with it would go away. There wouldn't be the deep connection with violent crime anymore, as there would be less money in it. Due to the lack of money, it wouldn't be as cool to do hard drugs.
It would also be taxable as well, so you wouldn't have the drugs only benefitting corrupt politicians and law enforcement, leading to a more open and honest political system.
I'd like to point out - again, I am in the military. I have never done an illegal drug in my life. I've thought this out, and there's only one way to get rid of our drug problems, and that's it I believe.
5. I have no idea about your first point...I think your picking at straws though. I've been studying Chinese for the last two years and speak / read Mandarin now, and am familiar with the situation with Liu XiaBo. I'm not sure that you've represented Paul's thought process on that vote well, and reading your material here, I would definitely not take your word for it.


I just finished Liberty Defined and I am now %100 for Ron. My leaders are idiots, my elders are pathetic. I've got nothing to lose and no more patience!

john foster

If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate. Unless, I guess, you wrote the above article.


This article has to be the worst-spun Ron Paul smear piece I've ever read. Ron Paul has forgot more about economics and the constitution than the people cited in this op-ed.


This rag is a joke. As a veteren of foreign wars with 23 years active duty Dr. Ron Paul has my vote. Anyone who wants to take on an ever expanding Federal Gov't, Police state, Federal Reserve and there funny money, bailouts, the lies, etc has my vote. Ron Paul is as about patriotic as they come.


The first comment by "mary alice" is another great backfire. "She" purports that Ron Paul supporters spam mindless and inane comments all over. Then, 50 thoughtful intelligent explanations as to why we will all vote for ron paul follow.


Don't miss the shellacking in comments that Justin Miller is taking in the Atlantic article linked above. It's even worse than the author of this piece is taking, and shows two things Ron Paul supporters have always known but that are increasingly true: 1) there is a wide and widening disconnect between elitist MSM writers like the one who wrote this this piece and the American people, and 2) the level of intellectual debate in online comments sections is much higher for Ron Paul supporters than for detractors, who are far more likely to engage in ad hominems, threadjacking, insults, etc.


You can pretty much sum up your entire rant, and put: "The overly judgmental wont"


He's got my vote, he not a puppet.


If you can set a fundraising record of $6mil in ONE day, I'm sure you might have a few supporters.
Dr. Paul has my vote.


Wow- Just Wow- Totally biased worthless crap of an article. You probably don't know one thing about sound money and probably wear a 'ignorance is bliss' mask everywhere you go. Please educate yourself! You probably love the ideas coming from the left side yet you are the guy who doesn't stop to think 'how it can be accomplished'?. Well i will tell you- it requires money. Money that the country doesn't have and you should know best about that since you live in California.

Just worthless - Just worthless- please go back to journalism school and write some facts next time.


Who Cares? Answer: The People who support the Constitution! The LA Times needs to read this document, then consider rewriting this story. If you other people support undeclared wars that never end, government-sanctioned political assassinations, unbalanced budgets, and dollar devaluation, then you are reaping what you have sown. The U.S. is crumbling from within from the actions of corrupt politicians. Ron Paul has shown that he is not corruptible. His voting record speaks to his fidelity to the Constitution. Believe it.
Ron Paul 2012

James C

The author of this article is completely wrong. He makes flat accusations without any support, using one-off comments from the void of the interwebs to support his positions. "Nonsense" to borrow a word. LA Times should censure what they put up for public consumption. This garbage reflects poorly on your establishment.


What a bunch of media B.S., I bet he'll live till he's a hundred, he's in great shape and he's by far the smartest politician I've seen. Ron Paul's got my vote.


After reading "Defining Liberty" I am no longer apathetic about politics in America. I am enthused for Ron Paul and want to help in any way possible. He has common sense ideas.


Ron Paul is a true patriotic American.
Disagree with him or not, Anyone who says otherwise is a crank.

Ron Paul started the tea party.
leave the tea party if you don't.

Ron Paul has first rate values.
He is the only politician that can stand by his voting record and tell you by what principles he voted for them.

Ageists don't exist.
Most of his supporters are young people.

Ron Paul 2012.

Citizen Joe in Los Angeles

I care that Ron Paul is running for President. I never voted for a Republican or Democrat until 2008. I VOTED FOR RON PAUL AND I WILL AGAIN. I took to the streets and campaigned for the first time in my life because I was inspired by his words of truth.

Ron Paul represents what made America great. This is about freedom from government interfering in our lives. This is about ending the illegal and immoral wars around the world. This is about taking care of Americans first. Restoring the Constitution is his mission.

He is the one of most honorable members of Congress who actually upholds the Constitution like he swore to do. Imagine that, someone in our government who actually is person of principle which is more than I can say for the corporate controlled media shills who try to misrepresent the truth.

Ron Paul is my President!

LA Times... you will eat you words!


I care. Ron Paul has my vote.




This article is ridiculous. The most biased account ever. I will never read the LA Times again. You disgust me with your propaganda.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 12 | »



In Case You Missed It...



Recent Posts
Reading Supreme Court tea leaves on 'Obamacare' |  March 27, 2012, 5:47 pm »
Candidates go PG-13 on the press |  March 27, 2012, 5:45 am »
Santorum's faulty premise on healthcare reform |  March 26, 2012, 5:20 pm »


About the Bloggers
The Opinion L.A. blog is the work of Los Angeles Times Editorial Board membersNicholas Goldberg, Robert Greene, Carla Hall, Jon Healey, Sandra Hernandez, Karin Klein, Michael McGough, Jim Newton and Dan Turner. Columnists Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus also write for the blog, as do Letters editor Paul Thornton, copy chief Paul Whitefield and senior web producer Alexandra Le Tellier.

In Case You Missed It...