Since it's Friday, I thought I'd write something on the light side. I couldn't think of anything lighter than the gravitas of the Ron Paul campaign.

Paul is a congressman from Texas who calls himself a Republican but is more of a neo-libertarian. He constantly refers to the Constitution and acts as if his interpretation is the only true interpretation. He has a rabid, small following who Google his name three times a day (this will help them find this piece: Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul) and comment on every Web site that mentions him. If what is said is derogatory, they become venomous and launch ad hominem attacks at the writer, kind of like LaRouchians. They go to every Internet presidential poll and vote for him repeatedly and then carp that America loves the man because he won a poll they rigged.

But let's look at Ron Paul on the issues. Let's start with national security:

Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America. And now, there are new calls for a draft of our young men and women.

We can continue to fund and fight no-win police actions around the globe, or we can refocus on securing America and bring the troops home. No war should ever be fought without a declaration of war voted upon by the Congress, as required by the Constitution.

Note that the only one to ever call or talk about a draft is Ron Paul and Charles Rangel and Rangel did it purely for political reasons. For the record, Congress did vote. I believe Paul was serving at the time. Note also every answer has the word "Constitution" in it.

When you're right, you're right. And when it comes to the subject of Iraq, the only candidate to be able to brag on that score at yesterday's GOP debate in Iowa was Ron Paul. What a breath of fresh air the man is. To the party establishment, however, Paul carries a foul, heretical odor. I'm sure they wish he'd just go away. Here's a recap of all the Paul highlights.

Note to the other Republican candidates: even your own base is now splintered on the question of the war. Sticking by the president is a losing issue. You'd be wise to listen to Ron Paul, at least insofar as the war is concerned.

Here's hoping she's OK:

Carol Paul, wife of Congressman and presidential hopeful Ron Paul, was hospitalized today in Iowa, where the couple was awaiting results of a statewide straw poll on the GOP presidential contenders.

Carol Paul, 71, was taken to a local hospital after suffering shortness of breath and low blood pressure, said Kent Snyder, a spokesman for Ron Paul's presidential campaign.

A presidential campaign is a serious grind on all concerned and the fact that it is now starting two-years out doesn't help. The candidates spouses are there for nearly every event and have to glad-hand and smile the entire time, a process that has got to be tedious at best. The fact that she is 71, where most of the other candidates wives are younger is something to be taken into account as the travails of the stump must be trying for someone twenty years younger.

I hope that Carol Paul takes a break from the rigors of campaigning and gets some rest as there are more important things than campaigning for primaries that are 4-5 months out.

Today, ABC reports an astonishing bit of news. Ron Paul's campaign actually has more cash on hand than rival John McCain's:

Paul's cash on hand puts him in third place in the Republican field in that important metric, although he is well behind leader Rudy Giuliani, who has $18 million in the bank, and Mitt Romney, with $12 million.

On the one hand, this shows the dismal turn of events for McCain. But the fact that Paul is more liquid than all the other Republicans running is something of a surprise. Though it is highly doubtful that Paul has any real chance of winning the nomination, his continued rise from national obscurity is something to consider. He boasts an impressive and fervent following owning to the fact that he has clearly defined principles and sticks to them. Unlike Giuliani, Romney, and McCain, you won't hear people calling Paul a flip-flopper. So long as he's allowed to participate in the debates, he will continue to draw disgruntled voters from across the political spectrum. And if he continues to raise large sums of money, he may just succeed at infusing his Libertarian-inspired issues back into the Republican party.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, anti-war voice of the Republicans, continues to blast his party for its militaristic stances.

The New York Times reported a testy exchange on Iraq between Paul and ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Wednesday's GOP debate.

"The American people didn't go in," Paul said. "A few people advising this administration, a small number of people called the neoconservatives hijacked our foreign policy."

"Congressman, we are one nation," Huckabee replied. "We can't be divided. We have to be one nation, under God. That means, if we make a mistake, we make it as a single country: the United States of America, not the divided states of America."

This isn't the first time Paul has drawn ire from his conservative colleagues. Pat Buchanan listed as "the decisive moment of the (Republicans' May) South Carolina debate" a confrontation between Paul and former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Switching from exploratory committee mode, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas announced that he is formally jumping into the 2008 fray. Get more details or watch video of the interview above (That's part 1. Here are links to part 2, 3 and 4):

Appearing on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal," Paul said he was at first reluctant to run, but that "a lot of people want to hear my message and I'm willing to deliver it."
...
"I'm very confident the Republican party has gone in the wrong direction," Paul said in his C-SPAN appearance. "We used to be the party of small government. Now we're the party of big government."

Don't know much about Paul? Here are a few factoids: Currently in his 10th term in the House, the Republican from Houston has served from 1976-77, 1979-1985 and 1997 to the present. He ran for president once before, in 1988 as a Libertarian candidate. And as an obstetrician-gynecologist, he's delivered over 4,000 babies.

Paul lately polls in the 1-2 percent range. Can he compete with the top tier candidates for the Republican nomination? Leave your thoughts below...

We've known for quite some time that Ron Paul is a "9/11 Truther" (or at least supported by those who are)--one who believes that 9/11 was done with the knowledge or complicity of the Bush administration. Now he's agreeing that conspiracies that have not yet happened will in fact come to pass:

Speaking to The Alex Jones Show, the Texas Congressman was asked his opinion on Cindy Sheehan's recent comments that the U.S. is in danger of a staged terror attack or a Gulf of Tonkin style provocation that will validate the Neo-Con agenda and lead to the implementation of the infrastructure of martial law that Bush recently signed into law via executive order, as well as public pronouncements from prominent officials that the West needs terrorism to save a doomed foreign policy.

"I think we're in great danger of it," responded the Congressman, "We're in danger in many ways, the attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that's in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment which endangers our troops and our national defense."

He believes that a terror attack will be staged to allow the evil Neo-cons of the Bush administration unimpeded access to attack Iran.

The esteemed representative and presidential candidate Ron Paul writes this on his Web site:

But today, too many politicians and lobbyists are spending America into ruin. We are nine trillion dollars in debt as a nation. Our mounting government debt endangers the financial future of our children and grandchildren. If we don't cut spending now, higher taxes and economic disaster will be in their future - and yours.

Hmmm. If that's the case, why is Rep. Paul asking for megabucks in earmarks for his district in Texas?

Read these requests (file in PDF) and note how vague they are and the lack of concrete numbers asked for. There are over a hundred requests for funding of various projects including "marketing wild American shrimp" to "construction" and "engineering services." The requests must be in the high millions or billions of dollars.

Paul seems to have adopted the "do as I say, not as I do" approach to governance so popular with the left. Perhaps Rep. Paul can forgo all earmarks to set a good example for the rest of Congress. He can be the anti-pork leader in the bloated legislature. Come on Rep. Paul, I challenge you to drop every single request for earmark funding and help us lower the debt. That seems to be your goal, but alas, I foresee you continuing your high-spending ways.

Hat tip: Ace, who is not nearly as nice as I've been.

Seemingly from out of nowhere, Texas Republican Ron Paul has made a huge splash in both Republican debates. The former Libertarian Party candidate for president is a hit on YouTube. He has consistently provided some of the most entertaining sound-bites of the race thus far. Last night's performance was no exception. Here's a montage.

There's a little something in there to piss everybody off. Abolish the Department of Energy, the Department of Education (he wasn't alone in this suggestion), and the Department of Homeland Security? That's some pretty strong stuff. Right wing pundits have had enough of the side-show, however, and are massing to denounce Paul as way out of step with the party. But just why has the candidate with the coolest name (even better than Rudy McRomney) gained so much political traction? Simple, he was never for the Iraq war, and wants to put an end to it immediately. Now there's a popular message.

And so it is in the year 2007 when you say something and become famous or infamous within minutes. Ron Paul's former assistant was perturbed at what the congressman had to say about the War on Terror and Muslim "root causes." Today, he decided to do something about it (note: the link to Redstate is a bit slow due to heavy traffic):

I am calling on Ron Paul to resign his seat, sooner rather than later. Otherwise Congressional District 14 voters from Victoria to Galveston will appear to be endorsing his treachorous, and near treasonous views on foreign policy.

...I am this morning, declaring my candidacy for Congress in the GOP primaries against Ron Paul. If he does not resign his seat, and if another Republican candidate does not declare against him, I will run a balls-to-the-wall campaign for Congress in Texas CD 14.

I am the guy that got Ron Paul elected to Congress in 1996. I can and will defeat him in 2008.

Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003

As I alluded to at the beginning of this post, the statements by Ron Paul and the rebuttal by Rudy Giuliani are the only two things to be remembered from this debate a year and a half out from the election. Paul may well have destroyed his career and Rudy bolstered his chances of gaining the nomination.

Paul is a ten-year Congressman no one, short of political junkies, had heard of until the last few weeks. Come November 2008, I suspect he will return to oblivion as Texans won't take too kindly to a sitting representative saying that America brought the attacks on ourselves. He's now an outcast and will remain so when it comes time for cash to be raised.

Kudos to Ron Paul for infusing the presidential race with a very unexpected twist. From this week's dust-up at the Republican debate, Paul and Rudy Giuliani locked horns on the notion of "Blowback," a term coined by the CIA back in the 1950's which postulates negative repercussions as a result of United States foreign policy. First, have a look at the issue from the perspective of Mr. Paul's camp:

There's a lot here that I agree with. For a while now, Giuliani has been guilty of politicizing 9/11. As much as I admired the mayor's humanity and steadfastness in the aftermath of the World Trade Center attack, I have recoiled from his absurd insistence that America won't be as safe if we elect a Democratic president. This from the man who nominated mob-linked Bernard Kerik as the head of Homeland Security?

People will remember only two things from last evenings GOP debate in South Carolina: Governor Huckabee's reference to Congress spending more money than John Edwards in a beauty shop. And a well deserved, and played, slap down of Ron Paul delivered by Rudy Giuliani.

In fact, here it is on YouTube already.

One of Ron Paul's men in the field is worried about the nice group of followers the candidate has attracted:

Caldwell notes that the head of the Pasadena Meetup Group, Bill Dumas, sent a desperate letter to Paul headquarters: "We're in a difficult position of working on a campaign that draws supporters from laterally opposing points of view, and we have the added bonus of attracting every wacko fringe group in the country....We absolutely must focus on Ron's message only and put aside all other agendas, which anyone can save for the next 'Star Trek' convention or whatever."

Paul also said that he sees no problem with the John Birch society -- a group of conspiracy theorists who see bogeymen every where.

The Paul campaign has been interesting to watch. He has amassed a strong core of zealous supporters who act within seconds to engage anyone who they perceive as wronging their man. The problem is that -- just as described above -- the people he is attracting are fringe lefties and righties who have no where else to turn. A substantial portion of the groups believe that 9/11 was an inside job and rabid Israel haters.

I know this is a hit piece by the Times and they would never attack an John Edwards, Hillary Clinton or Baracl Obama. But what they are saying is pretty damning. The facts are the facts and it paints a picture of a campaign that has been somewhat successful in organizing, but not in appealing to mainstream America. Paul's positions are not the norm and as such he has attracted a following that is dedicated, vigilant and small.

Mitt Romney romped in the Iowa Straw Poll, though it doesn't mean much since Rudy Giuliani and John McCain didn't participate:

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, got 31.6 percent of the more than 14,000 ballots cast, compared with 18.1 percent for second-place finisher Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas; 15.3 percent for Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback; 13.7 percent for Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo; and 9.1 percent for Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who rounded out the top five in the 11-man field.

This means nothing for Romney as he expected to win. For Mike Huckabee, it gives him a much-needed boost but essentially means he'll be around until the Iowa caucuses and then drop out.

The big losers were Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo, who failed to get any real traction during the immigration bill debacle and Rep. Ron Paul. Paul, in particular, needed a good showing to give clout to his alleged groundswell. That groundswell didn't materialize and if Paul can't win -- or even make the top three -- in a watered-down field, he has no business being in the race other than to act as spoiler -- which may be the plan.

The Iowa Straw Poll was once considered to be of great import but that time is passed. The candidates made a showing of busing people in and treating them all nicely in exchange for a vote that means nothing. I suspect that we'll see Brownback, Tancredo, Tommy Thompson and Duncan Hunter pack it in as they had dismal showings and their campaigns have not lit any sparks anywhere (in Hunters case, that's a shame). Paul will keep going as he has, in his words, "large Internet support," but real voting is not the same as spamming a blog's poll and hitting the Ron Paul button fifty times in three minutes.

Could a hot topic catapult a GOP second-tier candidate into the 2008 presidential nomination?

Earlier this year, it looked like illegal immigration could be that topic. It brought headlines to Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, and headaches for President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Now Republicans seem united in opposing illegal immigration. In last week's presidential debate, McCain, after making an insensitive reference to "the Guatemalans" on Mitt Romney's lawn, said, "No one, by the way, is for amnesty. I and the president of the United States, both of us from border states, came forward with a plan that we thought was comprehensive and workable with the priority being border security, which remains my position."
What remaining issue could spark an insurgency? Iraq. Anti-war Rep. Ron Paul of Texas articulated his anti-war argument in New Hampshire.