I expect better of Sullivan than this:
…I see in Paul none of the resentment that burns in Gingrich or the fakeness that defines Romney or the fascistic strains in Perry’s buffoonery. He has yet to show the Obama-derangement of his peers, even though he differs with him. He has now gone through two primary elections without compromising an inch of his character or his philosophy. This kind of rigidity has its flaws, but, in the context of the Newt Romney blur, it is refreshing. He would never take $1.8 million from Freddie Mac. He would never disown Reagan, as Romney once did. He would never speak of lynching Bernanke, as Perry threatened. When he answers a question, you can see that he is genuinely listening to it and responding – rather than searching, Bachmann-like, for the one-liner to rouse the base. He is, in other words, a decent fellow, and that’s an adjective I don’t use lightly. We need more decency among Republicans
Earlier in the piece, Sullivan says he was leaning toward endorsing Jon Huntsman, but “he simply hasn’t connected with the voters, generates little enthusiasm, and has run a mediocre campaign.” So because Jon Huntsman doesn’t connect with the crazy right-wing base of the Republican Party, Sullivan is endorsing a candidate who wants to make abortion illegal and who promises to shutter five government departments (“Energy, Education, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce and Interior“)? He’s supporting a candidate whose energy platform resembles the wet dream of a Captain Planet villain? He’s calling a bigot whose newsletter was a platform for white supremacists a “decent fellow?” Why would you support a man who wants to shutter Medicare and Medicaid, along with Social Security? Isn’t the social safety net flimsy enough for you as it is?
I get that Sullivan’s trying to get the Republicans to think differently—and I’m sure the fact that this endorsement will probably generate a couple hundred thousand hits for the Daily Beast won’t hurt, either—but this is ridiculous. Ron Paul is a man whose life goal is to destroy the United States of America by handing it over to the free market. I hope those outrage-inspired pageviews feel good, Sullivan, because you sure did earn them this time.
Way to troll your readers! Good job!
Here’s a snack:
He’s always been very libertarian. That you expected “better” just shows how little you know about Sullivan’s views.
Paul is lucky. No one has ever expected more out of him, at least I haven’t.
Throughout Ron Paul’s career he has been consistently championing the most important and urgent issues we as a Nation face. His opposition have been consistent liars. I support Ron Paul because he supports: Bringing the troops home. Closing the giant web of U.S. military bases that wrap the globe in American domination and violence.
Ending the Federal Reserve. Ending fiat money. Stoping the inflationary conjuring of ever more debt-based dollars, because it’s an ongoing theft of the People’s hard-earned purchasing power.
Repealing the Patriot Act.
Ending corporate personhood.
Stoping corporate welfare. Ending the massive subsidies to big oil, so the People get a fighting chance to deal with Peak Oil and climate change using our own creativity in place-specific localities.
Ending the brutal and bitter repression of the People’s efforts to grow our own local food—before the agribusiness giants find themselves without the cheap and abundant fossil fuels upon which the industrial food system so precariously depends.
The only thing about abortion that I don’t like is that Paul Constant’s mom passed on the procedure.
Seriously, I don’t know where you earned your bachelor’s in whining like a fucking cunt, but they must be proud.
Eagerly awaiting your endorsement Mr. Constant. If you’re rejecting Paul, then your remaining options are: police-state-fascists, war mongers and outright racists. I don’t know if you’ve been hiding under a rock for the last year and a half Mr. Constant, THERE IS NO FUCKING LIBERALS IN THIS RACE, THAT’S NOT GOING TO CHANGE, FUCKING GET OVER IT.
What is the big risk here? Do you really believe that white-supremacy will take hold as abortion becomes illegal under Paul’s leadership? Paul is not going to “fix” this country in any way that I would like, but by simply derailing our sitting dynasty of royal fuckups, we may have a chance to have a reasonable dialog about real things in 2016.
If elected he’s likely going to face a massive resistance from congress and the elite, and our economy will be deliberately tanked by bankers like it was back in the 1930’s. Don’t get me wrong though, I’d rather starve in breadlines with Ron Paul in office than give up any more constitutional rights for my unborn children and the rest of the future generations. Maybe that’s because I actually give a shit about this country, and am willing to concede and compromise certain things for the sake of the nation.
You, Mr. Constant spout the same fears echoed by Dr. Paul’s opponents making you just as willfully ignorant and complicit with the establishment’s plan to destroy American civil liberties. People like you CHOOSE the status quo because you are TOO chicken $H!t to think for yourselves. Go ahead and continue to let all the alphabet-network television talking heads continue to fill your empty little head with what they want you hear. I, sir, will be fighting for YOUR liberty and mine.
RON PAUL 2012!
I will never vote for a misogynist, and Ron Paul is one. That’s all.
Every bullshit-fueled, hand-wringing Democratic response to the threat of a Ron Paul candidacy I see pushes me closer to switching parties just so I can vote for him in the primary.
@Ovidius, then I take it you haven’t ever voted?
Or maybe you fool yourself into believing that a war monger like Barak Obama, (who has bombed at least 7 sovereign nations this year, and also claims the right to crush children’s testacies in front of their parents as a form of torture) is an alright guy, and certainly not a misogynist – presumably because Obama is black?
I don’t mean to sound racist, but Obama’s skin color is about THE ONLY THING that separates him from Newt Gingrich, sans the baseless rhetoric spewed during election years. Oh, and Obama hasn’t yet been caught cheating on his wife.
@10: What I meant to say is that a candidate who legislates against women is not a good candidate. I am also neither a neo-liberal nor a libertarian, and I don’t believe in free market capitalism. So… there’s that too. I’m not sure what the Obama race rant is about, so I’ll pass. I agree that there is not much separating the two major parties.