Sunday, December 5, 2010


Can someone please identify for me, the character that called Ron Paul a nut and a martian, in this clip. The other guy also, who says he's from Texas---- but especially the guy in the pink shirt.


  1. Roland Martin and Erick Erickson

  2. Wow! Thanks. EPJ rocks. I ask the question at 1:08 Sunday morning and it takes only 7 minutes to get an answer.

  3. Erick Erickson runs

    According to his facebook page he can be reached at this email address:

  4. According to Roland Martin's facebook page, he can be reached at:

  5. Apparently, Roland's already been dealing with some comments, if you have access to Facebook check this out:

  6. The guy from Texas, while making as foolish a comment as the pink-shirt guy re: RP being from Texas as well, did raise a good point inadvertently, I thought. Which secrets should remain secrets and which shouldn't, if you believe in government as Ron Paul does? Would RP disclose secrets he learned on any House committees, military/natsec or otherwise?

    Reminds me of my disappointment in seeing the great Ron Paul at a Mises Circle in Houston last year. With an actual Washington insider in our midst, I figured RP would break it down for all the libertyniks in his midst and drop some hot, fresh insider secrets or gossip on us-- who swatted who with a towel in the Congressional locker room, who spilled wine on whom at the Congressional tete a tete cocktail party, or who snorted coke off a hooker's ass paid for by their favorite lobbyist, at the very least.

    Instead, he provided none of that. He railed against government intrusion and cheered for liberty, but so did all of the other speakers before and after him. He was the one person in a unique position to share some nitty gritty with us and tell us all "how Washington really works", not that crap we see on TV all day but the inside, dirty dealings of power.

    He offered nothing. Either they don't share secrets with RP on Capitol Hill because they don't trust him (possible, I guess) or he takes his whole being a politician thing a little too seriously and thinks it's more important to preserve some secrets and knowledge from the beloved public than it is to disclose it.

    For their own good, I'm sure.

  7. This pair would love to go to the next Bilderberg meeting, where Ron Paul likely couldn't get in the door.

    Having worked with Dr. Paul at the hospital in Lake Jackson, my guess is he doesn't make it to events where his peers snort coke off a prostitute's ass. That said, surely he knows rumors, as many Congressmen cheat with paid staffers. He certainly knows where the sausage parts originate in legislation and how big money distorts the system.

    Dr. Paul is a principled man, but he needs to serve his constituents, which include Dow Chemical, shrimpers, and rice farmers.

    I saw three Bilderbergers speak on CNN's GPS this morning. It was ironic:

    It made me think of Wenzel's piece on Bob Rubin's "girls" doing e-mail and the elite's "code speak."

  8. PEU,

    Interesting, I will check out the link.

    Yes, RP is principled. But my point, which you admitted to in pointing out he must server his "constituents" is that ultimately even RP must compromise his principles to do what he does (professional politician). Personally, I find that disgraceful, whatever the reason.

    I think you are right to assume he knows about some of the stuff he mentioned-- that's what I would've liked to hear him speak about. I would like to see him work more on those occasions to disgrace the idea of government and to show that if you accept the role for government you must accept the way government works in practice, as well, and excuse all of that.

    Instead, he talked of the importance of liberty, which was made no more obvious and no more convincing when he did it than when any of the multitude of speakers who don't act as professional politicians spoke of it before him.

  9. Taylor,

    There is so much wrong with the logic and intent of your comments about Ron Paul, I barely know where to begin. You create some fantasy of your own design that you then say other people may try and hide from Ron Paul but because RP does not share these sordid details with you (that he may not know, which again are fictitiously created by yourself) this proves he compromises his principles. Which you find disgraceful! Despite him being a principled man, according to you.

    I know everyone on the Internet is desperately trying to be the one who first realized the principled man is unprincipled or the best athlete is actually only second-best, but this is just embarrassing.

    I will still have to consider Ron Paul's actions such as his voting record, his consistent refusal to take a salary, his dedication to the idea of liberty and so on as having more merit than the possibility he hangs out at the "hookers and blow" parties taking notes and then refuses to share them with you because he is actually a professional politician in disguise after all!

    The only purpose your comments serve are to embarrass yourself and seriously discredit your viewpoint and opinion.