Moneybombers Fight at Zero Feet

Ken Vogel talks to Trevor Lyman, ad hoc mastermind of Ron Paul moneybombs, about a new cash surge planned for Friday.

The plan, hatched just days ago... is to get Paul’s campaign past its $12 million fourth-quarter goal a full month before the quarter ends.

The vehicle is a website intended to solicit pledged contributions to be delivered online to the Paul campaign on Friday. Lyman is also hoping to score a twofer. The appeal used to attract the money is designed to bring more attention to Paul’s noninterventionist foreign policy philosophy, compared with that of his rivals for the GOP presidential nomination.

Via Lew Rockwell, West Virginia State Sen. Vic Sprouse (R) hustles to pour cold water on the hype.

Please. Lyndon LaRouche would haul in millions as well and his candidacy probably had a better chance of winning than Paul, meaning 0.001%.

Risible! But a pretty good smear nonetheless. In his final, 2004 run for the White House (he's going cold turkey this year) LaRouche started raising money in early 2001 and could brag, by April 2003, that he'd outfundraised Joe Lieberman and Howard Dean. The subtle difference is that LaRouche bilked a decades-old money network over a period of two years, whereas Paul has raised more than $9 million in just the last two months. (Sprouse's post is a cornucopia of chuckles, but note his worry about Paul supporters winning West Virginia's at-large delegates.)

I don't know what to make of the Ron Paul Blimp fund drive, though. Paul supporters have driven their message pretty effectively using the newest methods of communication, so why the throwback to such an old one?

Imagine... the mainstream media is mesmerized as the image of the Ron Paul blimp is shown to tens of millions of Americans throughout the day (and throughout the month). Wolf Blizter, stunned and as if in a trance, repeats the words "Amazing, Amazing."

I do approve of this promotional video.

Headline explained here.

Comments

John-David | November 27, 2007, 12:05pm | #

West Virginia State Sen. Vic Sprouse (R) is a partisan douchebag who would rather see an reliable party hack go down in flames in the general election than a maverick who is in touch with the general population on the war and other issues who could win the general election. Fuck him in the ear.

Taktix® | November 27, 2007, 12:05pm | #

Cue Edward in 5...
4...
3...
2...
1...

Edward | November 27, 2007, 12:11pm | #

Sorry that took so long. I have severe diarrhea, and this post will be short because I have to get back to the bathroom. Anyway, Ron Paul is a Nazi who has no chance of winning.

Uh oh. Just shat myself. Be back later.

John C. Randolph | November 27, 2007, 12:12pm | #

The blimp is an excellent idea, because of the value of the publicity. For $350K, they'll easily get $10M+ worth of air time on news shows.

-jcr

J sub D | November 27, 2007, 12:18pm | #

Taktix®, Take a bow. You da man!

Although a conspiritionist would suspect collusion between you and Edward. ;-)

iih | November 27, 2007, 12:21pm | #

The blimp is an excellent idea, because of the value of the publicity. For $350K, they'll easily get $10M+ worth of air time on news shows.

Don't bet on it.

Reinmoose | November 27, 2007, 12:21pm | #

Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.

Um.. last I checked he had 5% nation-wide. And his blog entry was posted today

sage | November 27, 2007, 12:23pm | #

Hey Edward,

I normally don't want to reply to you, but since you're not really Edward I figure it's OK.

You know how those folks at Nationalist Review just hate Ron Paul? Even they don't think he's a racist or racist sympathizer:

"As with Clinton’s case, no one really thinks that Ron Paul is a racist or an anti-Semite. Yet he won’t return the money because his “pain threshold” has always been very high — he hardly cares what anyone thinks, as his maverick voting record in Congress demonstrates. "

Reinmoose | November 27, 2007, 12:24pm | #

His charge that the media are covering him because he's "different" and that the media "loves 'different'" is retarded. They wouldn't be covering him at all if he was different, but only raised $200,000 and had 1% in the polls (here's looking at you Duncan Hunter!)

Episiarch | November 27, 2007, 12:25pm | #

The more people there are who get all dismissive and hysterical about Ron, the more effect he is having. Bring it on.

Reinmoose | November 27, 2007, 12:29pm | #

I like how the ad on his page reads "Hilary for 2008?" with a giant picture of her.

Smappy | November 27, 2007, 12:30pm | #

The craziest thing about the blimp is that they already have $270,000 pledged. At this rate they'll be in the air by December.

Virgil | November 27, 2007, 12:35pm | #

I can't be the only one who sees this and thinks 'Hindenburg'.

Great way to evoke the thought 'crash and burn...'

Legate Damar | November 27, 2007, 12:39pm | #

So will this thing be getting buffeted by Plains winds around rural Iowa in December? Or freezing itself down in rural New Hampshire?

God bless the grass roots and all, but ?!??!

John-David | November 27, 2007, 12:40pm | #

I was sure the blimp was a joke when I first heard about it. I can't believe they are seriously going to launch a Ron Paul dirigible.

Jay D | November 27, 2007, 12:43pm | #

I don't know what to make of the Ron Paul Blimp fund drive, though. Paul supporters have driven their message pretty effectively using the newest methods of communication, so why the throwback to such an old one?

My guess. Campaign finance laws. The blimp is specifically targeted at people who have already donated their $2,300 to the campaign. The blimp is a PAC. They can donate up to $5,000 more to the blimp.

Convoluted laws restricting free expression encourages people to do odd things they ordinarily wouldn't think of.

JL | November 27, 2007, 12:48pm | #

I keep commenting on Vic's blog, and it keeps getting removed. there was nothing rude or disrespectful in my response.

Brian | November 27, 2007, 12:52pm | #

That WV guy has been busily deleting posts in his comment section all day.

Why is it that it's the people who brag the most about their manly foreign policy choices that turn out to be the biggest cowards online?

Pig Mannix | November 27, 2007, 12:53pm | #

Interesting article on Gambling911:

The folks at online gambling website Sportsbook.com have now made Ron Paul's chances of raising more than $6 mil a 5/9 favorite. In other words you would have to bet $9 to win $5 (and get your initial $5 back if the amount comes in over $6 mil).

Even if he doesn't collect another nickle between now and 12/16, that's still a total of $15 million for the quarter. That's some serious bucks!

Brian | November 27, 2007, 12:55pm | #

At one point, the over/under on 12/16 was only $5 million, paying 1 to 1.

If you bet the over, you could donate for free up to the amount of your bet. Assuming the over came in.

Brandybuck | November 27, 2007, 12:56pm | #

I'm starting to think that the Republican leadership will be supporting Hillary if Ron Paul gets the nomination. I'm already seeing stories on some "conservative" sites about accepting an inevitable Hillary win.

TLB | November 27, 2007, 1:00pm | #

I would be very surprised if GoodyearAndEvent sponsors don't have a way to prevent non-GoodyearBlimps from flying over stadiums or at least being shown on TV. So, trying to crash a game probably isn't going to work. However, flying over a large city would certainly get a lot of attention.

However, a much more effective way to boost RP would be to go to his opponents' campaign events and ask questions, as described here. That plan only costs a little time and gas money, and by showing the gaps in their policies it would help reduce their popularity. It would also show up the MSM. If you can't do it yourself, encourage others to do it.

Curious | November 27, 2007, 1:01pm | #

Would the blimp fly over pro football games or only fly in the primary states?

Can they get Led Zepplin (or any of the surviving members) to play a couple of tunes on the blimp?

NYVoter | November 27, 2007, 1:06pm | #

Any Republican advocating surrender and immediate withdrawal from Iraq, allowing that country to completely implode is not going to get more than 2% of the Republican Party. And, that’s exactly what Ron Paul has.

Um.. last I checked he had 5% nation-wide. And his blog entry was posted today

I am a republican as of October 07 and also got 4 of my friends to register as republicans. While not a lot, if others are doing the same I think the normal republican primary voters are going to be surprised by the turnout next year!

joe | November 27, 2007, 1:29pm | #

It's strange how Sprouse keeps using the phrase "the media" to describe 70% of the American public.

"He is different. And, trust me, the media loves ‘different.’"

It's November 2007, senator, nearly seven years into Bush/Cheney. Everybody loves 'different.'

"lines up with the liberal media on Iraq" You mean, considers it a mistake and a failure, and wants to see us begin to withdraw immediately and be out within a year or two, like a 2:1 majority of the American public?

At this point, with Paul showing some staying power, shallow dismissals like this only serve to help Paul in the expectations game.

Ska | November 27, 2007, 1:35pm | #

to go to his opponents' campaign events and ask questions

What if they did that at the campaign events in LEDs on the blimp?

highnumber | November 27, 2007, 1:39pm | #

Damn. I thought that said "Monkeybombers."

It is Tuesday.

Moron Mentor | November 27, 2007, 1:39pm | #

Any actual Nazi would despise our Constitution and despise anyone who is pro-individual freedom.

For Ron Paul could be associated with fascist scum like that would be if Americans had become so stupid as to not understand a single thing about politics and history. Uh Oh.

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 1:57pm | #

"I'm already seeing stories on some "conservative" sites about accepting an inevitable Hillary win."

Apparently, they havn't seen the latest Zogby poll that shows Hillary losing handily to all 5 of the leading Republican contenders, Guiliani, Romney, Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee. The same poll shows Obama and Edwards defeating all Republican opponents. The Democrats need to wise up and dump Hillary.

Mr. X | November 27, 2007, 2:23pm | #

I'd like to see the polls Sprouse relies on for his "2% nationwide" claim. According to pollster.com, Ron Paul hasn't been that low in any poll conducted after the 1st of November.

I asked him the same on his "blog," but my comment never made it out of moderation.

matt | November 27, 2007, 2:48pm | #

Ron Paul is to the presidency what Ma$e was to 90's hip-hop.

Who's hot, who's not? tell me who rock, who sell out in the stores? You tell me who flopped, who copped the blue drop? Who's jewels got robbed? Who's mostly Goldie down to the tube sock, the same old pimp, Mase, you know ain't nuttin changed but my limp, can't stop til' I see my name on a blimp

Yo, I thought I told you that we won't stop.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | November 27, 2007, 2:48pm | #

Okay, wait a second. The blimp is a good idea and all, but what in the fuck is the Navy doing paying $400,000 a month for a goddamned blimp!?

Eric Dondero | November 27, 2007, 2:52pm | #

Great. It took us decades to lose that Lyndon Larouche is a libertarian nonsense, that mainline Americans used to slap on us libertarian activists.

And now it's risen up again, this time in comparison to Ron Paul's campaign.

Thanks a lot Ron Paul. Thanks for linking us with the Larouchies. Yet another decade of explaining to folks that we have nothing to do with them.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | November 27, 2007, 2:55pm | #

Dondero,

If you were at all famous, libertarians would have to explain to folks that we have nothing to do with you.

squarooticus | November 27, 2007, 2:55pm | #

I'm not sure which is worse: linking libertarianism to Larouche or to Giuliani.

matt | November 27, 2007, 2:55pm | #

Thanks a lot Ron Paul. Thanks for linking us with the Larouchies. Yet another decade of explaining to folks that we have nothing to do with them.

There there, Eric, now you know how we feel when we have to spend our time explaining to people that libertarianism has nothing to do with you.

Thank goodness you're fairly obscure and it doesn't come up often.

joe | November 27, 2007, 2:56pm | #

Rattlesnake Jake,

Apparently, they havn't seen the latest Zogby poll that shows Hillary losing handily to all 5 of the leading Republican contenders, Guiliani, Romney, Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee. The same poll shows Obama and Edwards defeating all Republican opponents. The Democrats need to wise up and dump Hillary.

Apparently, you didn't see the Gallup poll - Gallup, RJ, not some internet poll - that shows each of the leading Democrats beating each of the leading Republicans in a matchup, and Hillary winning many of the races by larger margins than her opponents.

As a matter of fact, Hillary does as well or better than Obama, Edwards, and Richardson in most of the matchup polling that's done - and yet the Mighty Wurlitzer only reports on the polls where she does the worst.

I think it's pretty clear who they're afraid of, and it's not Obama.

joe | November 27, 2007, 2:58pm | #

Um, does anyone else see a little square with an X in it at the beginning of my last comment?

sage | November 27, 2007, 3:03pm | #

I just see the square, joe. But it's too small to notice.

Randolph Carter | November 27, 2007, 3:09pm | #

I see a cross.

Dondero, that was some weak sauce. Ron Paul makes people think LaRouche is a libertarian? Please.

kohlrabi | November 27, 2007, 3:11pm | #

joe,

I see a cruciform.

Brandybuck | November 27, 2007, 3:12pm | #

Dondero,

If you were at all famous, libertarians would have to explain to folks that we have nothing to do with you.

I finally finished reading "Radicals for Capitalism". It's a huge book, and extremely comprehensive. Yet try as I might, I cannot find any references to Dondero in it. If not for his whiny posts here, I would never have heard of him.

J sub D | November 27, 2007, 3:13pm | #

Um, does anyone else see a little square with an X in it at the beginning of my last comment?

I see my Mommy having sex with a wildebeest there. But I have unresolved issues.

squarooticus | November 27, 2007, 3:13pm | #

Joe, I see this:

http://www.krose.org/~krose/static/joe.png

Kyle

joe | November 27, 2007, 3:21pm | #

Thanks, everyone. That's weird that it looks different to everyone.

I just went Mac (once you go Mac, you never go back) and it's probably got something to do with that.

Reinmoose | November 27, 2007, 3:27pm | #

joe: what was it supposed to be?
(i just see a box)

Syloson of Samos | November 27, 2007, 3:36pm | #

FWIW here is a whole slew of relatively recent general election polls: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

Syloson of Samos | November 27, 2007, 3:40pm | #

Anyway, the primaries haven't even started yet.

joe | November 27, 2007, 3:41pm | #

Reinmoose,

It's not supposed to be anything! It's supposed to begin, "Rattlesnake Jake,..."

I have no idea what happened there.

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 3:42pm | #

"Apparently, you didn't see the Gallup poll - Gallup, RJ, not some internet poll - that shows each of the leading Democrats beating each of the leading Republicans in a matchup, and Hillary winning many of the races by larger margins than her opponents."

How current is that Gallup poll? The Zogby poll has just been released. Rasmussen last week also showed Guiliani and I believe Romney both running ahead of Hillary. The Zogby poll has a 1% margin of error and has historically been much more accurate than the Gallup poll.

Warren | November 27, 2007, 3:48pm | #

I'm pretty sure it's a matter of which font your browser is displaying.

Fluffy | November 27, 2007, 3:49pm | #

So Eric, because some stupid-ass West Virginia cracker fuck writes a line about Larouche on his shitty blog, that he deletes comments from because he's a fucking coward, that's Ron Paul's fault?

I would think that if anyone is dragging down the name of libertarianism, it's you, since in this thread: http://www.reason.com/blog/show/123587.html#comments you openly and unapologetically advocate genocide and war crimes. Now I have to explain to everyone I meet that libertarianism is not the same as genocide and war crimes. Thanks a lot man.

Tacos mmm... | November 27, 2007, 3:53pm | #

Joe,

You must have hit ctrl+letter when you were aiming for shift. If you do that on a mac, you can get a number of characters with accent marks, umlauts, copyright signs etc. You must have gotten a character that's mapping out differently depending on the particular font in use.

Pig Mannix | November 27, 2007, 3:53pm | #

I'm starting to think that the Republican leadership will be supporting Hillary if Ron Paul gets the nomination.

Maybe not, he seems to be starting to have an influence on mainstream conservatives.

Check this article, basically advocating the gold standard, at National Review. When was the last time that topic came up in mainstream political discourse?

Suddenly, an arcane and settled issue is back on the table again. Goes to show you nothing is permanent in politics....

joe | November 27, 2007, 3:54pm | #

RJ,

It's a new Gallup poll - within the last few days - and corresponds more closely to other polls.

As for Zogby's accuracy, he's pretty good, but not really any better than Gallup.

Anyway, here's a site that reports on many different polls on matchups. You can see for yourself that the vast majority of them, including the ones done this month, show Hillary beating all Republicans, just like the other Democrats.

Except Fox, which seems to be skewed about 10 points further towards the Republicans than everyone else.

joe | November 27, 2007, 3:56pm | #

Tacos mmmm,

Le'ts see what this does:

joe | November 27, 2007, 3:56pm | #

Aha!

Nothing!

Warren | November 27, 2007, 3:58pm | #

The blimp is a waste of money. I don't see it getting ANY attention. There are dozens of advertising blimps out there, how many do you ever notice? The idea that the MSM will stop in wide-eyed slack-jawed wonder is laughable. Plus, if you flew it over Boston, that would be a terrorist act equivalent to hijacking a commercial airliner. The city would be evacuated, there would be panic.

joe | November 27, 2007, 4:00pm | #

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

Er, here's the link that shows all the matchup polling, and I totally misread the Fox numbers. They were showing Rudy with a big lead over Hillary three years ago.

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 4:06pm | #

"As for Zogby's accuracy, he's pretty good, but not really any better than Gallup."

Just look at the last two presidential elections. Zogby was right on the money while Gallup and the other polls are way too skewered towards the Democrats. I think it's because they only call during the day and not after 5:00. In other words, they usually only poll housewives and welfare recipients. Just admit it, joe, Hillary is slipping and you Democrats need to change horses. Hillary is looking like a swayed back old nag. Hillary will bring out a whole slew of Republicans to the polls to vote against her and they will vote against lots of lower level Democrats as well. Not only will the Democrat Party lose the general election for the third time in a row, they will also lose control of Congress just as Hillary caused them to lose control of Congress, plus most Governorships, and state legislatures. She will unify the Republican Party like nothing else.

Edward | November 27, 2007, 4:07pm | #

Who would vote for an idiot who says this?

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion.—Ron Paul “The War on religion”

Edward | November 27, 2007, 4:18pm | #

"It is from the Bible that man has learned cruelty, rapine, and murder; for the belief of a cruel God makes a cruel man." --Thomas Paine "An Answer To A Friend Regarding The Age Of Reason," The Prospect, 12 April 1804

Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

joe | November 27, 2007, 4:22pm | #

You wish, Jake,

Isn't amazing that, of the ten or so different polling organizations out there, it is only the one that is telling you what you want to hear that is a credible polling organization, and all the others are skewed?


Look at the link, Jake. You, and whatever wing-nut media organ you got your information from, are just cherry-picking the data you like, despite the overwhelming amount of evidence on the other side.

Welfare bums and women, huh? Good thing you're not letting your poltical preferences color your view of the race.

Hillary does about as well as the other Democrats, and all of them beat all of the Republicans, in just about the polls that have come out in the past few months. You picked one that is an outlier this week. Whoopie.

BTW, I'm going to vote against her in the primary, as are between 2/3 and 3/4 of Democrats in the country, according to all the polls. I'm not sure where your coming from with the "Just face it" pose.

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 4:23pm | #

Edward, I would vote for Thomas Paine or Thomas Jefferson if they were running. Unfortunately, since they're not, I'll vote for Ron Paul. I don't agree with everything he says, but overall, he comes closer to my point of view than any of the others in either of the major parties.

J sub D | November 27, 2007, 4:25pm | #

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers.

Edward, once again you display your woeful ignorance. Go here, read , or have read to you, the article, come back and say something intelligent.

To other reasonoids, I'm aware the intelligent thing is too much to ask for from Edward.

J sub D | November 27, 2007, 4:27pm | #

Oops, my bad Edward, you were quoting Ron Paul. Still it's an ignorant comment. On that you and I agree.

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 4:29pm | #

"Isn't amazing that, of the ten or so different polling organizations out there, it is only the one that is telling you what you want to hear that is a credible polling organization, and all the others are skewed?"

I've always put more stock in Zogby polls than any of the others, regardless of what the results of the polls are.

I expect more and more polls to show Hillary slipping as time goes on. The Zogby poll is a complete turnabout from what it showed in July. In July, Hillary was handily ahead of Giuliani and McCain and ahead of the others by double digits. People are finally wising up to the bitch.

joe | November 27, 2007, 4:45pm | #

Zogby does excellent polling when he's doing straight polling, but is also a master of elegant tweaks when he does polling for Republican candidates and orgs, which is a big part of his business.

This particular poll has been wisely criticized for its methodology, which uses a demographic sample more skewed towards Republican voters than most. It's far from obvious that we should take Zogby's word over everybody else's.

Maybe Zogby's right and everyone else is wrong, but at this point in the race, I think it's best to stick to the median of a number of polls. Picking the ones that seem to be the most credible might be a better strategy for getting the numbers exact on election day, but when the one you're picking as the best is so far to one tail of the curve, it's probably just an outlier.

iih (aka Ali) | November 27, 2007, 4:51pm | #

http://ronpaulchocolate.com/

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 4:52pm | #

We'll see what the other polls say in the near future. I'm expecting to see the bitch continue to fall as more and more people learn more and more about her.

Rattlesnake Jake | November 27, 2007, 4:57pm | #

Gore, Kerry, and Ted Kennedy have all recently endorsed Obama. I wonder what effect that will have.

joe | November 27, 2007, 4:58pm | #

RJ,

The Zogby poll is a complete turnabout from what it showed in July. In July, Hillary was handily ahead of Giuliani and McCain and ahead of the others by double digits. People are finally wising up to the bitch.

Looking at the collection of polls on pollingreport.com, a large majority of them show gains or no movement on Clinton's numbers between the summer and now. The few that have her declining show a small decline within the margin of error, not the mid-teens swing Zobgy finds. Zogby has found a significant cohort that was pro-Clinton and has switched to pro-Guiliani, that nobody else has picked up on?

I suppose it's possible that that has happened here, but I don't think it's the most likely explanation. Yes, we'll see what happens.

I expect that Clinton's big lead in the Democratic primary is going to fall, but that the decline in head-to-heads with Republicans that Zogby thinks he's found will turn out to be illusory.

You sure do like to call her a bitch, don't you?

iih (aka Ali) | November 27, 2007, 5:04pm | #

Great news from Iowa:

http://www.soc.iastate.edu/news/caucus.pdf

Survey by Soc. Dept. at Iowa State:

The results are:

Ron Paul: 27%
Romney: 24%
Huckabee: 15%
Giuliani: 13%
Thompson: 10%
McCain: 10%
Tancredo: 2%

The survey size was 2,185 students, which represents 8% of the entire student body. All students were invited to participate via email and were given 5 days to complete the survey. The survey was conducted by the university's Department of Sociology.

Reinmoose | November 27, 2007, 5:08pm | #

Wow, what kind of terribly uncool college kids would vote for Tom Tancredo?

Johncjackson 3rd | November 27, 2007, 5:14pm | #

Who The Fuck is Vic Sprouse?

iih (aka Ali) | November 27, 2007, 5:16pm | #

Wow, what kind of terribly uncool college kids would vote for Tom Tancredo?
The two who sit in the back (or may be the fron)?

BakedPenguin | November 27, 2007, 6:56pm | #

...if you flew it over Boston, that would be a terrorist act equivalent to hijacking a commercial airliner. The city would be evacuated, there would be panic.

That's a great idea, Warren! Think of the free publicity! Maybe Paul could also show up to the next debate in Boston with a LED name tag.

Tannim | November 27, 2007, 7:00pm | #

The blimp is brilliant for simple reasons:

Serious reasons:
1.) Blimps get noticed by people, especially kids, who point them out to the parents.
2.) It's Big and Slow, plenty of opportunity to read and digest the message, even for the dumb neocons.
3.) It's different. Who else is doing it?
4.) It's a giant mobile billboard: Great advertising.

And a satirical reason or two:
1.) It runs on Edward and Dunderhead's hot air, so it's not using fossil fuels and is environmentally friendly.
2.) It's a WMD: Word-by-Massive Drigible.

Lost_In_Translation | November 27, 2007, 7:41pm | #

I hope the neocons don't try to ground the blimp with cries of national security threat...or high powered rifles.

Pro Libertate | November 27, 2007, 9:36pm | #

I hope Paul's Lib Zeppelin plays the bluesier early Led Zep. Like, I dunno, "Communications Breakdown"?

Communication breakdown - it's always the same,
I'm having a nervous breakdown - drive me insane!

Pro Libertate | November 27, 2007, 9:44pm | #

Make that just one Communication.

libertreee | November 27, 2007, 10:01pm | #

Check this article, basically advocating the gold standard, at National Review. When was the last time that topic came up in mainstream political discourse?

Pig Mannix

Actually, Google: Jack Kemp + gold.

The early supply-siders helped get the gold thing going in the early eighties. Jack Kemp kept bringing gold up throughout his career. He didn't favor abolishing the Fed, though.

And, he didn't get as much traction as most of us hope Ron Paul will get with it...

Edward | November 28, 2007, 12:57am | #

What do you suppose Ron Paul thinks "replete" means?

Edward | November 28, 2007, 12:58am | #

Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both REPLETE with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion.—Ron Paul “The War on religion”

lunchstealer | November 28, 2007, 10:59am | #

I liked this headline a lot better when I read it as "Monkeybombers Fight at Zero Feet"

joe | November 28, 2007, 12:50pm | #

Rattlesnake Jake, if you're still here.

Zogby's real poll - the telephone poll - shows Hillary Clinton with about a 5 point lead in the matchup. It was his real polls that were so accurate in 2004.

In the 2006 elections, his "interaction" internet polls were extremely inaccurate.

Chris | December 4, 2007, 5:27am | #

The head of the West Virginia Republican State Convention pretty much confirmed that RP is in the top 4 for support from committed delegates. http://www.wvmetronews.com/index.cfm?func=displayfullstory&storyid=22381

Also, I know from attending some past RP Meetups that RP fans were aiming to be at-large delegates.

Chris | December 4, 2007, 5:31am | #

The Ron Paul Blimp, although I read yesterday it was a no-go, would be great for college bowl games.