Can you see the Ron Paul for President boomlet community's collective heads exploding.

Oh, is THAT what that was?

I thought it was just a bunch of mosquitoes farting.

A distinction without a difference, perhaps . . .

The Republicans did the same thing to Alan Keyes in 2000. I didn't particularly agree with his politics, but he was a real hardcore conservative and I guess he made the faux conservatives like Bush look bad with the base.

And now you're doing it again, this time with Ron Paul...

What do you people have against open debate?

Thanks for your input, but we don't need leftists telling us who is conservative and who is not.

Paul, for example, is an isolationist libertine. Nothing conservative about that. He'd be far more comfortable in the nest of traitors across the aisle.

Ron Paul 2008 www.ronpaul2008.com

"Paul, for example, is (a)... libertine."-ja

(Holy Opus Dei!) What are you talking about? Everybody's a libertine at least a few minutes a week. The libertine in me compells me to check out Hannah Montana occasionally!

(But if anyone is not a "libertine", it's probably Ron Paul.)

(Or are you referring to the later Alaister Crowley brand of "libertine"? In which case, see: Neocons.)

Ron Paul will be invited otherwise we'll burn down some building as a show of protest.

Frankly, I am sick and tired of a state like Iowa being thought of, perceived to be so so so important in the 50 state scheme of things. Perception is all but this Iowa, NH stuff is plain silly. About 100,000 over all will vote in polls in both states combined. There are more people in my neighborhood than those yahoos. Not only should Paul, Tancredo, and other 4-5-6th tier guys should be dropped from any more debates, but the front-runners should say, wait, I win 6 delegates or whatever silly little amount these two states have. Why bother? Why not winnow the debate down to the top 4 and get on with the serious business of nominating someone who can actually face and maybe even beat Her Highness or BO? The rest is dreamy silliness from people who should know better.

Yes! Elite Nabukadnezar wins. I know that having arson friends has always helped me get invited to stuff.

What a scam. Left or Right; all have vested goals. Why not let all thoughts be acknowledged. Or is this a communist process, with all so obvious predetermined outcomes?

Sorry, Adam, but Paul's "thoughts," such as they are, have had adequate exposure already. There are simply no takers among the rational. Such is the history of the Libertarian movement: after thirty years of running candidates, they have made not one inch of progress. There's a reason for that.

Now, there is always a new crop of fresh-faced, young supporters who attempt to make up for their lack of numbers with volume and enthusiasm, but just like those who came before them, one day they too will mature.

Why would we include Paul, a man who can't beat the margin of error in the polls, to put forth his fringe views, any more than we invite flat-earthers to geophysics conferences?

The fact that Paul, a natural libertarian, is running in the GOP primary instead of as a Libertarian should tell you all you need to know about the Libertarian Party.

I've said for years that the LP is trying to build their presence from the top down. They continue to try to elect a president when most of the casual voters in this country barely know what a libertarian is.

In 2004 the LP presidential candidate came on KFI for two segments. He was almost incoherent. He kept trying to get in the usual libertarian plank of the illegal drug war.

The LP can't get one of their adherents elected to a governorship, to Congress, and as far as I know, not even to a state legislature.

My research (admittedly, not in depth, but some nevertheless) only turns up LP'ers as county commissioners, boards of supervisors, etc.

As much as Libertarians espouse free and open markets, they'll whine and cry as soon as their candidate is not afforded automatic inclusion in a debate. They can't accept the rejection of their platform by the market of people choosing to listen to them, or not.

Well another example of a blackout. Now this is a one-sided debate. Can't anyone with half a brain understand what is and what isn't will continue on regardless of the party? Finally, someone came out and spoke a little truth and shook the establishment. What is wrong with no big government, printing our own money, no war, and deconstructing the IRS? Time again for AIPAC, and London banking system's to pick another "leader of the free world". Now we have fear mongers who say "terrorism" every other word, and healthcare socialist to pick from. What an ignorant little country we have become.

You state:

"They've all had their chance to make their case with the earlier series of debates, and they have obviously failed to do so."

Actually Ron Paul stated his positions quite clearly in the earlier debates considering the time allowed.

And after he won the first two debates to be excluded from this debate is nothing short of shocking!

What's going on here? Ron Paul IS going to be there, despite the original attempt to drop him. And the people reporting otherwise must be dreaming for the masses.

Complain. The only phone number they answer is 515-971-7363. Give them hell.

"...Paul, for example, is an isolationist libertine. Nothing conservative about that. He'd be far more comfortable in the nest of traitors across the aisle."
________________

No, Ron Paul is not an isolationist. He is a non-interventionist, there is a diffrence weather you recognize it or not. Dr. Paul does not want to isolate the U.S. from the world (which ironically is occuring more and more today despite the U.S.'s foreign interventionist policy). As far as him being conservative, please tell me how belief in limited govt.,limited taxation, anti-welfare state, and TRUE free market economy (as oppossed to present day corporatism) is anything but conservative??

Paul got 400 to the NH debates, twice as many as any other in NH including Obama, with NO food and those supporters in Iowa would have been there anyway. There were 1,000 people there, 400 more than at the ITR/ICA forum but some outlets obviously can't bring themselves to print the truth.

He's getting attention because he has support. I don't know who you think picks the president in this country, but last I knew it was the people, NOT THE MEDIA who can tell stories enough to make their noses grow.

http://dailypaul.com/node/499

Ron Paul = 1,000
All the others = 600

Maybe we should vote for who the higher ups in the Republican party want us to vote for. You can see what a GREAT job they've been doing lately. We should all want more government spending and more government control of our lives and be happy to get our children killed for nothing. 3rd term for Bush! Let's all get chipped!

I can't believe it. You say "They've all had their chance to make their case with the earlier series of debates, and they have obviously failed to do so. They have no chance". But the reality is that no one is paying attention to the campaign yet! It's too early to make any calls. Some candidates may not have even gotten on board (Fred Thompson, Al Gore). So to say that they have already failed....I think it's a stretch since no one is even listening. On top of that, you make references to crack smoking and child pornography because Dr. Paul is a libertarian. You are so small minded. It would be like me saying...fine, vote for Rudy and say hello to nuclear war and goodbye to all our civil liberties. You really sound stupid.

we are kidding ourselves if we think we really have a choice. It will be Hillary/Obama vs. Guiliani/Thompson in the end. The small guy always gets bent and we the people get the same useless selfish politicians in the end.

Only elitists hold back competition. Government is full of elitists, we really don't need any more.