31. I went from Democrat to Undecided in order to vote for him in the Primaries.

Posted at 6:33PM on Dec 5th 2007 by Alexa

32. Seriously people, if you haven't read up on Ron Paul's history and his policies then you're doing America a great disservice. There are major issues facing America today and the other candidates will just bring us more of the same disastrous, big government policies.

Read up on Ron and get out there to support him:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Posted at 6:35PM on Dec 5th 2007 by TimeForChange

33. Haha, go Ron Paul!

Posted at 6:37PM on Dec 5th 2007 by Arrrr

34. Ron Paul is MY candidate, and for those of you who say/think he's "liberal," just goes to show how ignorant YOU are. How about doing some homework!
Libertarian does NOT equate to Liberal!

Ron Paul, just as with any other candidate, cannot control who supports him!

Ron Paul is the "hare" in this race and the other tortouises best watch out over their shoulder.

* If you think our/YOUR country needs to get back to governing in accordance with our Constitution, Ron Paul is the man.

* If you want the government OUT of your business, Ron Paul's the man.

* If you want to abolish the IRS, Ron Paul is the man.

* If you want someone who will work to LOWER YOUR TAXES, Ron Paul's the man.

* If you want out borders secured NOW, Ron Paul's the man.

* If you want our government to NOT be able to tap into your private business, Ron Paul's the man.

* If you want to see us OUT of organizations and treaties that threaten American Independence and Sovereignty, Ron Paul's the man.

* If you want to STOP stop special interests from violating property rights and literally driving families from their homes, farms and ranches by Eminent Domain, Ron Paul's the man.

* If you think our troops need to come home and that our foreign policy is in the toilet, Ron Paul's the man!

Heck, Congressman Paul even refuses to participate in the "lucrative" Congress pension plan, has NEVER voted to raise congressional pay, and has NEVER voted to raise taxes!

OK, I'm just getting started, but I'll let you do your own homework!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/
http://www.house.gov/paul/

The "main stream media" pays him little mind because they are SCARED of the growing support he has and I see TMZ has jumped on the bandwagon to try and dismiss what RP has to offer and wants to do to SAVE our asses in the good old USA.

And oh, just a couple of weeks ago in November, RP's supporters make him the recipient of the LARGEST EVER one day fund-raising monies of any candidate in history of more than $4.2 MILLION DOLLARS.
Paul’s total deposed Mitt Romney as the single-day fundraising record holder in the Republican presidential field. When it comes to sums amassed in one day, Paul now ranks only behind Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton, who raised nearly $6.2 million on June 30.

THAT, my friends, is RON PAUL! :)

Posted at 6:38PM on Dec 5th 2007 by proudRONPAULgal

35. If you enjoy the federal government taking approx 45 cents out of every dollar you earn,
all the while infringing on your right to privacy and trashing The Constitution, by all means vote for any of the usual suspects. However, if freedom is important to you then check out Dr. Ron Paul, the candidate the mainstream media wishes would go away.

Tucker Carlson is behind the Bunny Ranch endorsement.

http://www.blacksheepnews.com

Posted at 6:47PM on Dec 5th 2007 by Cheryl

36. hos vote too.

Posted at 6:52PM on Dec 5th 2007 by bossman

37. Ron Paul is the one person who could save this country.

Posted at 7:04PM on Dec 5th 2007 by Kitty

38. ron paul is a libertarian posing as a repuke. and if people don't know what libertarians are all about do your research. ron paul is a whacko. sure he voted against the war and I applaud him for that but his stance on other issues are c-r-a-z-y

Posted at 7:52PM on Dec 5th 2007 by canela

39. #13 first of all TMZ didnt say that it's in Vegas, they said that its in Nevada, Mound House is located in Nevada d'uh!!!

Posted at 7:53PM on Dec 5th 2007 by LIZZIE

40. ron paul is a libertarian posing as a repuke. and if people don't know what libertarians are all about do your research. ron paul is a whacko. sure he voted against the war and I applaud him for that but his stance on other issues are c-r-a-z-y

Why don't you try backing up your claim that his ideas are crazy with an argument? Otherwise, your opinion isn't worth a damn.

Posted at 7:56PM on Dec 5th 2007 by TimeForChange

41. Ron Paul vs. A Nation Of Suckers: Why We Won't Listen To One Man's Common Sense About Terrorism

Read these two statements about terrorism.

Ron Paul: "They're not attacking us because we're rich and free, they're attacking us because we're over there."

Osama Bin Laden: "Contrary to what Bush says and claims — that we hate freedom — let him tell us then: why did we not attack Sweden?"

And this one from Alan Greenspan about the Iraq War: "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."

These three statements come from three bizarre quarters. One, a presidential candidate who doesn't have a hope in hell of becoming president. Two, the biggest bastard on the planet. Three, a man who had the power to do something about our debt crisis, but didn't lift a finger.

Yet these three statements have one thing in common: they speak the plainest common sense.

As such, they stand out like lonely buoys on an ocean of BS about terrorism and the Iraq War. Which raises the question: why is this? Why are we, as a nation, still suckers for Bush's rhetoric about "the war on terror"? Why do we buy his BS about the Iraq War? Why are Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton suckers for it as well, since neither of them want our soldiers to get the hell out of Iraq? Why do we fall for blowhards like Bush and Giuliani, instead of absorbing the common sense of Ron Paul? What the hell is going on here? Are we Americans terminally stupid?

For those of you unfamiliar with Ron Paul's views, here are three key statements from him:

1. "They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East for years. I think Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? Would we be objecting?"

2. "I believe the CIA is correct when it warns us about blowback. We overthrew the Iranian government in 1953 and their taking the hostages was the reaction. This dynamic persists and we ignore it at our risk. They're not attacking us because we're rich and free, they're attacking us because we're over there."

3. Back in November 19, 1997, in a letter to President Bill Clinton: "Policy toward Iraq is not designed to protect U.S. national security. It is instead a threat to our security because it may lead to war and loss of American lives, increase terrorism and certainly an additional expense for the U.S. taxpayer. The hyped rhetoric coming from Washington which describes Hussein as the only evil monster with which we must deal in the world is a poor substitute for wise counsel. "

And while we're going back a few years, here's what George Bush said in an October 2000 debate with Al Gore: "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road."

Even Bush 2000 didn't buy the BS of Bush 2007.

So is our nation having a common sense debate about terrorism? Nope. The opinion pages of our national dailies are hardly buzzing with pro-Ron Paul and anti-Ron Paul arguments. The fog of Bush BS has settled over America like the smell of crap over a factory farm.

So what is going on here? Since I believe we Americans are only intermittently stupid, why have we been permanently stupid for the last six years? Why have we stashed our brains in our butts this long?

One reason: 9/11.

We've taken to acting from trauma, caught in the vagaries of human psychology. The trauma of 9/11 has spooked us into stupidity.

And the BS from Bush has kept us spooked stupid and mired in our collective trauma. We buy into the Bush BS about "the war on terror", when terrorism is actually a crime to be handled by the FBI (and is in fact very well-handled by Scotland Yard in England, where they have a huge disaffected Muslim population). We buy into the Iraq War as a "war on terror" when it's a war about oil. We buy into "support our troops because they're defending our freedom" when our troops are in Iraq to support Halliburton and Exxon. That arch-adulterer Rudy Giuliani is running on our trauma, and leads the GOP pack because of it.

Ron Paul may speak common sense till he's blue in the face but, spooked by our trauma, we're stuck in the fog of "the war on terror." Ron Paul may even win the GOP debates: an MSNBC poll during the California Republican debate asked who stood out among the pack, and with over 75,000 voting, 14% chose Rudy Giuliani, 19% chose Mitt Romney, and 48% chose Ron Paul. On the issue of who showed the most leadership qualities, Paul won with 44% of the vote against Romney second with 18%.

All that doesn't matter. Because when it comes to a choice between common sense and trauma, we and our media will prefer trauma every time.

Why is trauma so popular? Let's see how it expresses itself: in a desire for vengeance. After 9/11, we wanted action. Revenge. Dead bodies. So we went into Afghanistan, and then into Iraq. It didn't matter that we ended up killing the wrong guys, as long as we killed somebody.

Americans are suckers for vengeance. Hollywood lives off it. Witness the steady stream of movies in which the kid or girlfriend of some hapless dude gets killed, and then the dude spends the next two hours going after the baddies in one long act of vengeance.

That's the movie in our heads that we're enslaved by. Our post-9/11 lives and times and talk, what is it? One long act of vengeance. A revenge fantasy that got itself painfully quagmired in Iraq.

It also plays itself out in the shell of itself that the GOP has become. In teaming up with the Religious Right, the GOP is acting out of the big Evangelical trauma - their unnatural sense of sin about their natural sexual desire. It's driven the Religious Right, and the Republican Party, to fear and hate queers. This is a political platform? The Republican Party has become the party of loonies. Who do they fear and hate these days? Mexican immigrants. That's their latest "platform." No matter that Republicans are offending the next big voting block of Latinos. Nope: they'd rather spout short-term vengeance on these goddam illegal immigrants who use our hospitals and schools and bring disease and breed like rabbits. Never mind that it's GOP businessmen who lure the poor bastards here in the first place to exploit them for off-the-books jobs we don't want.

To really understand our lust for vengeance, it's instructive to see it as the other side of cowardice. Bush-Cheney and the neocons (none of whom fought in a war) had the crap scared out of their sissy sphincters by 9/11. Ever since, they've been acting from fear and paranoia, and we love it.

A man of courage — like Nelson Mandela — might have said after 9/11: let's examine what's going on here. It appears our foreign policies have caused people to get so upset, they've committed a massive crime against us. Well, then, let's do something about it. Number one, let's get Osama Bin Laden, the man who committed the crime. Number two, let's get our troops out of Saudi-Arabia. Number three, let's get Israel and Palestine to negotiate. Number four, let's promise not to overthrow any more foreign governments in future, like we've done so often in the past. Number five, let's get rid of our 700 military bases in other people's countries, so no-one else will have a reason to attack us. All in all, let's stop being a destabilizing force in the world.

But what did Bush-Cheney and their neocon chorus of sissies do? They didn't get Osama Bin Laden. They took our troops out of Saudi-Arabia, only to have them occupy Iraq in an endless war. They did nothing about getting Israel and the Palestinians to negotiate — until now, seven years later. As for the rest, forget about it.

In acting from trauma, Bush-Cheney let our enemies decide our actions. They did exactly what Bin Laden wanted. They followed his script to the letter. They invaded the Middle East. They made the world dislike us. And they built up our enemies, the terrorists, by acting as Al-Qaeda's main recruiting agent. They've been played for suckers by a terrorist. They've made all Americans the suckers of Osama Bin Laden.

When Nelson Mandela got out of jail, what did he do? He said, "I'm not bitter." He took responsibility for his trauma and set it aside. He didn't let his enemies decide his actions. He didn't act from a sense of trauma when he negotiated South Africa's freedom - he acted from a sense of justice.

Unlike Bush-Cheney. Unlike the neocon cowards. Unlike we, the American people. We watch our boys and girls die in Iraq with no sense of complicity. We refuse to take responsibility for our trauma. We refuse to acknowledge that our actions motivated the terrorists to commit their horrible crime against us. We refuse to set our trauma aside. We're killing Iraqis because we're sore about 9/11, not because we're driven by a sense of justice.

The greatest irony of all is that we're killing the wrong guys. Instead of hunting down Bin Laden from a sense of justice, and holding Bush-Cheney responsible for doing this, we're quagmired in their rhetoric about "the war on terror."

The single most mind-boggling fact of American political life is this: NO ONE IS TELLING BUSH-CHENEY TO GET BIN LADEN ALREADY, FOR CHRISSAKE!!!

It just goes to show how deep and wide the betrayal of our nation by our media goes — from the New York Times to the Washington Post, from Fox News to CNN, from the Nation to the Weekly Standard, from the Huffington Post to the entire blogosphere. They, too, are lost in the fog of "the war on terror."

The blood of 3,000 dead Americans in the World Trade Center cries out for justice, but the man responsible for their murder is free as a bird, doing videos, while our Army, instead of hunting him down, is killing Iraqis.

How crazy is this: we're acting from trauma, but in the fog of rhetoric, to alleviate our pain, we're killing people innocent of the crime against us. Common sense has been replaced by madness. Our revenge fantasies even include torturing our enemies. We're so upset, we don't mind seeing ourselves as hooded clerics in the Spanish Inquisition. We're so upset, we'd rather spend a trillion bucks on killing people thousands of miles away than on paying our teachers better, or rebuilding our crumbling infra-structure. Or investing in the invention and implementation of green technologies that could make us oil-independent. We could launch a great new Manhattan Project, a Landing on the Moon-type initiative about renewable non-fossil-fuel energy - call it the Green Freedom from Oil Project - but we'd rather blow it all on Iraq. It's beyond insanity. It's beyond psychosis. It's dumber than a monkey pulling out its entrails because it's been shot in the stomach. America is suffering from brain cancer, from the battiness of senile dementia. We're an Alzheimer's dad who's forgotten his name and his children, a mongoloid drooling on his necktie, an asylum inmate sleeping in his stools.

Ron Paul, the lonely speaker of common sense, is out there, but we won't give him a fair hearing. We'd rather listen to clueless Rudy banging on about "going on offense against terrorism." We and our media just loves ourselves a jumbo dose of trauma. We just loves ourselves a deluxe helping of cowardice and macho posturing. We just loves ourselves a long draught of vengeance. We'd rather kill Iraqis — and our troops — than listen to common sense.

There is Ron Paul, loud and clear, saying the emperor has no clothes. And there is America, loud and clear, saying the emperor has the most fabulous sense of fashion.

Heck, maybe we Americans are terminally stupid after all.

Posted at 8:07PM on Dec 5th 2007 by ANationOfSuckers

42. Rudy and the NRA??? Those two don't mix at all. Rudy is a gun-grabbing RINO.

Posted at 8:15PM on Dec 5th 2007 by Danny

43. It's sad that people like TMZ smear Ron Paul because a brothel owner and prostitutes support him. I don't know what TMZ is trying to suggest with this, prostitutes support all the other candidates as well.

Ron is not "liberal" as someone suggested. I do not know where they are getting that from, he is a Libertarian running as a Republican to get more votes and because he supports many of the Republican ideals such as small government.

I do not know why people call Ron crazy either. They do not elaborate why, they just call him crazy because they don't want to take the time to actually learn anything about politics it seems. I would like everyone who thinks Ron is crazy to explain why, and I would like to know why this brothel has anything to do with him.

Posted at 8:55PM on Dec 5th 2007 by AdamG

44. "ron paul is a whacko. sure he voted against the war and I applaud him for that but his stance on other issues are c-r-a-z-y"

-What- specifically do you think is crazy? You must think your argument is very weak if you won't even say what it is. I urge everyone to read about his political views themselves at his campaign website. www.ronpaul2008.com

Posted at 9:05PM on Dec 5th 2007 by AdamG

45. Anyone that criticizes RON PAUL clearly does not know anything about him. He is the ONLY candidate that will fight preserve freedom...real freedom. Even the hookers at the BunnyRanch can see that.

Posted at 9:23PM on Dec 5th 2007 by neisha