Coming Up

Ron Paul

"Dr. No."

"Dr. No." Source: FX in the City hide caption

itoggle caption Source: FX in the City

Without fail, we receive several phone calls from supporters of Rep. Ron Paul, urging us to devote more time to his campaign for the Republican nomination, to talk about his platform, to invite the
man himself to be on the show.

On this blog, readers have also asked us to give more time to "Dr. No." In February, Brandon, one of our listeners, wrote this:

I'm a bit bewildered, amongst all the discussion of the Republican field and the supposed lack of anyone with real conservative appeal, that NPR has had zero discussion of Ron Paul. He has the most conservative credentials out of any of the remaining candidates. I feel the only reason that the conservative base is not flocking to his campaign is that he is consistently marginalized or left out of the discussion, as he has been from this program. I'm really disappointed that his name hasn't even come up.

For the record, Rep. Paul has been a guest on our show. And we'll have him on air again, come Wednesday. He'll join us from the Newseum, here in Washington, to talk about his campaign and his new book, The Revolution: A Manifesto.

To the Ron Paul supporters reading this, if you're going to be in our neck of the woods, there are a few seats still available for the show on Wednesday. If you'd like to attend the broadcast, drop us a line.

Comments

 

Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the NPR.org Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

Thanks for the coverage NPR (finally)!

Question for Ron Paul:

As the true anti-war candidate, do you find it frustrating that Barack Obama has been given that label by the mainstream media?

For those that don't know Barack's record he
* Voted to continue funding the war
* Plans to leave tens of thousands of US troops in Iraq to protect our embassies, bases, and contractors
* Has stated that he will consider bombing Pakistan and Iran -- that no options are off the table
* Appears willing to continue wasting American lives and resources with more interventionist adventures

For those of you that don't know, Ron Paul he
* Voted against the war AND against funding it
* Advocates withdrawing ALL US troops from Iraq
* Advocates a foreign policy of not intervening in the affairs of other counters (including Pakistan and Iran)

Sent by Ted Salmon | 1:20 PM | 5-14-2008

Thank you for having Dr. Paul on as a guest for your program. KUER just had their spring fundraising drive and the only reason I didn't reach into my pockets and donate was because I never heard Ron Paul's name once on any political discussion or in the results of early primaries or caucus states (and I'm an avid NPR listener).

That being said, Dr. Paul's ideas are so fantastic and great for his country, I would gladly reach into my pockets and donate to the greatness that is NPR for reaching out to him and including him in the political discussion. I'm sure you'll find that some of his supporters are a bit rapid at times, but the majority of us are intelligent, clear thinking, intellectuals that vote on issues rather than impressions or soundbites.

Sent by Jake in Salt Lake | 2:27 PM | 5-14-2008

How will you run for President if John McCain wins the Republican Presidential nomination?

Sent by Joe Clappis | 2:28 PM | 5-14-2008

How can anyone of real intelligence and experience believe that any SINGLE "ism" can solve all problems. What about asking what "ism" should be applied to solve a particular problem.

Sent by Don Chicoine (shi quin) | 2:44 PM | 5-14-2008

I supported Dr Paul during his champaign and really wish he had the nomination.

At least in the beginning, Dr Paul's platforms stimulated much needed political conversation about the state of the dollar, which has largely ended between the big 3 candidates. I believe a great opportunity was missed to have a national dialog regarding the FED, and how thier policies have affected the everyday lives of 300 million americans.

Sent by T Hayward | 2:47 PM | 5-14-2008

I believe that, though a protracted in-party primary race is bad for the party in question, it is good for democracy. The ability for the electorate to fully vet candidates, instead of being given the candidates pre-packaged and without competition, is in everyones best interest. Your thoughts?

Sent by scott smith | 2:48 PM | 5-14-2008

Please ask Mr. Paul about his position on handling global warming

Sent by daryl | 2:49 PM | 5-14-2008

why is it that libertarians and thier ilk plan for the us to stop being the leader of the free world? I think That our way of life is worth defending and helping those that look to us as a goal for for thier country. if we dont lead then what is the alternative for the world?

Sent by brian steidl | 2:49 PM | 5-14-2008

Ron Paul has my vote in 2008.

It is interesting to note that at a pro-firearm ownership rally he allowed armed individuals near him and shook hands with him.

That impressed me...that level of trust. Does he have thoughts about this?

Sent by Richard Stewart | 2:51 PM | 5-14-2008

LIFE, Liberty, and the Persuit of Happiness. Why would anyone do away with the first?

Sent by Sandra | 2:52 PM | 5-14-2008

I'm all for Libertarianism - meaning policy that supports and upholds human agency and autonomy - in principle, but I see a serious problem in enacting such a policy in a country like America that has an un-involved and politically disinterested and uneducated public. If we lift regulation on business, as that isn't the government's role, but do not at the same time have a populas that is involved and organized enough to the point that they could enforce public-interest concerns through a decentralized and non-governmental process, it just opens the door for big business to do whatever they want without restriction. My question, then, is this - how does Ron Paul address the concern that, if his libertarian policies were enacted in our current America, it would be a "get out of jail free" card for big business as the public is simply not at a level of political education necessary to democratically and participatorily regulate big business interests?

Sent by Vijay Krishna Ramesh | 2:53 PM | 5-14-2008

With all of the OBVIOUS voting fraud in each and every state, RP Headquarters must be up to their armpits in evidence!! When will Team Ron Paul step up to the plate and call out the cheaters?!?

Sent by Brian Canfield | 2:58 PM | 5-14-2008

ch and every day,our monetary system is in chaos...I am retired and on ssi. spent three years in the army during Korean war most of the time served in Korea 1951 to 1953...I wish people can see just how badly our country has gone the wrong way and I hardly agree with your ideas about bringing the troops home and not having an Empire around the world...go back to the workings of our founding fathers which they work and died for so hard...We are not doing our young people justice by sending them to war for the price of a barrel of oil...and then the pundits call them heros so we will agree to this wrongfull war...May you have a very sucsessful run for the highest office in our land.. we need you steering the ship of state...Joseph...
P.S. For years I was a democrat have change to independent

Sent by Joseph Willette | 2:59 PM | 5-14-2008

Come on, Ron, the Vietnam War had its roots in John Foster Dulles pushing SEATO. Lyndon was opportunistic. Both major political parties bought into involvement toward a small nationistic(not puppet of China) nation of North Vietnam. Nixon widened the disaster. I realize history repeats itself in different directions of colonial powers.
There is plenty of blame to pass around without blaming the Democrats. What we really need to know is how to avoid disasterous involvements and short term historical memories.

Sent by Tom Bryan | 3:03 PM | 5-14-2008

The guy is a racist, pure and simple...why is NPR giving him the time of day? A bunch of internet groupies with ideas like shutting down the IRS does not make a viable movement. We have real problems that need real answers.

Sent by GW | 3:12 PM | 5-14-2008

A day late and a dollar short as it were.

Sent by Chilli | 4:12 PM | 5-14-2008

Your coverage of Ron Paul has been uneven at best. Like other media, NPR used terms like "longshot" when giving Dr. Paul mention.

If Rep. Paul received the same unbiased, even enthusiastic reception from the commercial/war media as their anointed "frontrunners," we'd see a different race today.

Sent by Evil Banker | 4:14 PM | 5-14-2008

Gee thanks for the coverage, NPR! You've always got my back!!

Sent by Nicole | 4:18 PM | 5-14-2008

Stephanopolus told America that Dr. Paul would not get the nomination.
Predicting the future is the beginning of creating it.
Does Dr. Paul have any idea how much impact 10dollar/gal gas would have on the economy?

Sent by Jay Rhizor | 4:54 PM | 5-14-2008

Wouldn't it be wonderful, if we could bring our troops home from 130 countries,to protect us much like china does. They don't have troops in other countrys. Why do we always have to intervien in other countries. They can't hurt us, and they know it without serious consequences.

Sent by Ervin Armstrong. | 8:28 PM | 5-14-2008

Nice to hear Dr. Paul speak about balancing the budget by bringing troops home and closing bases overseas.

It's too bad the other candidates do not share these views in light of our $9 trillion debt.

Sent by Critical thinker | 8:51 PM | 5-14-2008

Great interview - this is what the GOP needs to hear.
I was going to support McCain, but his recent comments have lost my vote this fall.
I'm going to write in Ron Paul as a statement unless he endorses another candidate.

Sent by brad | 9:14 PM | 5-14-2008

Mr. Paul, would you change the way business lobbys' congress, (legally recognized as a 'person')which I believe
is contrary to original intent of the founding fathers.

Sent by Dale Hoff | 9:17 PM | 5-14-2008

Dr. Ron Paul, I have always been in the class of 50k wage and less, we have always fallen in the grey area, where we are taxed to death and it didn't matter what President we were under. The apathy is staunch in our wage area. But my plight to get people to stop this political division of Democrat or Repulican is a never ending battle. How can you help me gain more respect to get your message out especially to the falling Democrats who will not vote for Obama if he is nominee. They want change but they cannot see past your title of Republican. Can we figure out a way to encompass this group's support.

Sent by Betty L Hohensee | 12:29 AM | 5-15-2008

The interviewer of Ron Paul is ignorant. He said the supreme court is not the federal government. Its people like this that hinder the Revolution. NPR needs to have educated interviewers instead of knuckleheads like this guy.

Sent by Sam | 2:56 AM | 5-15-2008

I was embarrassed for Neal Conan that he seemed to have difficulty with the fact that the Supreme Court is one of the branches of the FEDERAL government, when Dr. Paul said that laws on abortion should be decided at the state and local level, not by the federal government. This was in regards to the decision of the supreme court on Row vs. Wade, which is now the law of the land. Conan tried to correct Dr. Paul and said that it wasn't the federal government, it was the supreme court... Mr. Conan needs to dust off the old books from his government and civics classes.

Sent by Paul | 12:19 PM | 5-15-2008

I was very pleased with the coverage of Dr.Paul. I have to admit that between the well thought out questions and straight forward answers, I couldn't help but let a few giggles of excitement slip out. Though my father teased me for getting emotionally enthralled by Dr. Paul's appearance on your wonderful show, an involved political science student like myself can't really help but smile when I hear Dr. Paul's amazing and logical message which has been unfortunately neglected.

Sent by Jesus Valentino - Miami, FL | 12:31 PM | 5-15-2008

Question for Dr. Paul: Our progressive welfare system is morally justified by the "social contract" that many assert binds us together. Do you, Dr. Paul, accept the premise that we are bound together by a social contract (I don't remember ever signing any stinking contract)? If so, you must believe in the power of government to enforce that contract. If not, how do you deal with society's increasing wish to be forced to be each other's keepers?

Sent by Bruce Smith | 10:49 PM | 5-15-2008

Why can't Congressman Paul file a legal suit against the major media outlets for his lack of coverage. If nothing else, perhaps this would force the media outlets to explain their position.

Sent by Ken Archambault | 11:19 PM | 5-15-2008

Thank you, finally, NPR - but I'm afraid it's too little too late. Dr. Paul should have had this much airtime a year ago. Have to laugh at the message that said we should be the 'leader of the free world' and that 'our way of life is worth defending and helping those that look to us as a goal for for their country'. I suppose he wouldn't mind if he was barbecuing steak in his backyard and vegetarians from the other side of town forced their way on his property and pressured him (maybe even declare 'war' and bomb his house with his wife and children in it) to throw away the steak because eating meat isn't good for you.

I will be voting for Ron.

Sent by Christina | 11:32 PM | 5-15-2008

Thanks NPR for having Ron Paul on the show. I have much more respect for NPR now.

Sent by Elliot | 12:34 AM | 5-16-2008

Thank you NPR for having Dr. Paul on!! You do the people of the world a great service by having him on. Yours in liberty and freedom.

Sent by Josh | 12:36 AM | 5-16-2008

What gives the government the right to take half of our income from our paychecks-from the fruits of our labor? Wouldn't you like to keep all your paycheck? With the only draw back being you have to pay for your own health insurance and retirement. Imagine making 100K/year and keeping all of it. WOW. And don't say to fund the government because we can fund our country just fine with taxes from sales, property, import taxes, excise taxes and so forth... Come on democrats, wake-up from the matrix-wake up from the brain-washing and support Ron Paul... The only true american out there.

Sent by Peter Ojeda | 1:13 AM | 5-16-2008

I wonder if John McCain came to Dr. Paul and asked him for his advice what he would tell him?...and also if Dr. Paul would ever consider running for the Senate in Texas?

Sent by Beau Phillips | 4:20 AM | 5-16-2008

I am registered voter in Georgia and cast my vote for Ron Paul in our state primary. I am now feeling helpless because "our" State voting laws will not allow my "write-in" vote for him in the general election of November to be counted (because he ran in the primary and "lost"). What can voters in my situation do, who REFUSE to vote for the remaining (presidential) candidates that appear on the November ballot?

Sent by Jim Callihan | 8:35 AM | 5-16-2008

I heartily agree with the above statements made about "speaking evil" over Dr. Paul's campaign.
After all, Media is the new opiate of the masses.
NPR, you are funded by the american people. Ron Paul is the people's candidate.
Thank you for spending my money on something that is within my interests. The reason I believe the media has treated him this way is he doesn't represent the interests of the media corps.

However, regarding him as unviable is pandering to the status-quo. It sends a message to those who may not want to drink the "kool-aid", and vote for a person who is the lesser of the evils, that to vote for Dr. Paul would be a waste of their vote. WRONG!
I believe him to be the only option for the viability of this Nation, and we should spread a message of hope.

Sent by Monica in Jacksonville Florida | 8:53 AM | 5-16-2008

If John McCain gets the GOP nomination, I will either write in Ron Pauls name in on the ballot, or vote libertarian. Ron Paul is the only one I truely trust. And I believe him because he has a voting record to back up everything he says and votes for.
You can't find that in any other candidate.

Sent by M. Lane Culpepper | 11:07 AM | 5-16-2008

its not about conservative or liberal....republican or democrat......it about The Constitution....let's start following it.....

Sent by joe sac | 11:16 AM | 5-16-2008

Dr.Paul, I think thay you are wasting your time if you think that you can work within the confines of the Republican Party and its beholding ties to the major self serving interests in this country. The same holds true for working within the Democratic Party. It is simply time to challenge both major parties by starting a new one. I think that with todays efficiencies of communications that a new political party with your principals would experience remarkable growth. Most Americans have "had it". "We've "had enough" of the staus quo. Onward to a new path back to the wisdom of the founding principals.

Sent by Don Wayne | 11:20 AM | 5-16-2008

Completely abondoning the rest of the world in favor of isolationsim isn't realistic, and if it were, it would be catastrophic at BEST. We need to encourage other fledgling Democracies to seek the mantle of freedom themselves, and the BEST way to do that is by foreign aid, trade agreements and YES, Mr and Mrs. Isolationist, even troops, if they want them. It would be nice to think that we can just ignore the rest of the world and they won't bother us, but realistically and historically, that hasn't been the case.

NOW, ...about Ron Paul... I believe he's a noble person who sincerely desires to bring change to the country in what he sees as a positive manner. However, he cannot completely eliminate the IRS by himself. He cannot balance the budget by himself. He can't even change the strategy of engaging in wars by himself. Without a constinuency of people willing to work with him in the other two branches of government, he'd be a lone voice crying in the wilderness of Washington. Sure nothing would get done, but who wants that?

I like his ideals of balancing the budget, of fair taxation for all, of NOT being the police force of the world, and of NOT sending foreign aid to countries who despise us. To state that we can make these changes at the blink of an eye is completely and utterly irresponsible. If Dr. Paul had started his c rusade with a realistic and workable plan for change, MORE PEOPLE, like me, would've been aboard the R-P train to the White House. He's really a Libertarian (and that's not at all a bad thing, I could vote for a Libertarian) who needs to run under a Party banner more in inline with his ideals. He's drawn more than his share of kooks to his campaign, and that hasn't helped him either. To suggest that we need to completely jump into a completely new attitude of the Liberalism that he espouses, seemed kooky in itself and it's what got him labelled as such, banishing him from many people's consideration forever.

And that is too bad, he could've done some good...

Sent by Tom Fairweather | 11:43 AM | 5-16-2008

I was so excited when I first heard Dr. Paul was running for the office of Pres. and have been so disappointed with the way he was treated by the media, especially Fox News which I no longer watch. That means you Hannity. It has been eye opening to the manner in which candidates are supported, or not, by those who have influence with the major news players. Go Ron Paul! and thank you NPR for having this interview.

Sent by Cynthia from Georgia | 12:17 PM | 5-16-2008

Thanks Ron for enriching the debate on all of these issues. You give many of us hope.

Sent by Ben Straub | 1:41 PM | 5-16-2008

Thank you NPR and thank you Dr. Paul.

Sent by Seth Sutter | 3:14 PM | 5-16-2008

WE THE PEOPLE are inspired by Dr. Ron Paul! Thank You Dr. Paul for helping me understand the extreem disgust I have always felt about our government! Let the Revolution began!

Sent by daniel peterson | 4:06 PM | 5-16-2008

Ron Paul is no racist. When asked about possible VPs, Ron Paul suggested a black economist. Ron Paul also wants to end the drug war and pardon and release all non violent drug offenders, which are mostly minorities.

If someone wants to accuse Ron Paul of racism, they should support it with something that Ron Paul has said to that effect, not just the ramblings from a staff writer from a news bulletin from 20 years ago.

Sent by Aaron Kinney, Los Angeles CA | 4:57 PM | 5-16-2008

I believe Ron Paul wants the USA to Lead by Example, not by shoving a gun in the backs of the uncooperative.

Sent by AAAAANDRE | 10:26 PM | 5-16-2008

Great show. Good information and good call ins.

Sent by dam ian | 11:59 PM | 5-16-2008

everything I have heard Ron Paul say makes great sence and I belive that americans need Ron Paul as our president a true american for america more candidates should work for the people instead of themselves and the government they profit from

Sent by Michelle | 1:41 AM | 5-17-2008

Comments are all to many for me to put on here about Dr. Ron Paul. He is a wonderful man with the right ideas to help bring our country back to where it should be. If anyone can do it I truly believe he is our man. I can only pray that some miracle were to happen and I wouldn't have to worry so much about my children's future but I feel thats inevitable now and has been for quite some time. When is the world going to wake up and smell the freaking coffee.... Look at what we are doing to our FUTURE GENERATIONS!!!!!! God HELP us all. I am for you till the end Dr. Paul!!!!! RON PAUL REVOLUTION.....GET YOU SOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sent by Stacey - Victoria,TX | 1:43 AM | 5-17-2008

How do we get back honest media with Colin Powells's son selling all the markets to a few select people? Why does the FCC allow stations to call themselves news enities when they offer little to know news and how do we end regionalism of major news stories

Sent by David L. Davis | 1:52 PM | 5-17-2008

People love to use their ignorance to explain their arrogance. Someone said that we should be the "Leaders of the free world" and that our "way of life" is worth defending. The way I live should not be imposed on those who do not wish to live the same way I do, and it's no different with other countries. We should not force others to take what we have to offer and not give them the option to leave it. If we want to be a free nation we have to accept that others will live the way they want to live and that people from all walks of life are different and neither you nor I have the right to force anyone to live the way that one or a few persons believe they should. We were given life to live it the way we choose to and I believe that as long as someone is not physically harming or purposely misleading people they are entitled to live whatever way they would like to, whether or not I disagree with it. The best way to achieve understanding and acceptance is through example, learning and leaving choice up to the individual, not by force. People may comply with a system of force because of ignorance or fear, but that doesn't mean that they accept it. And a little FYI he is not an Isolationist. He proposes free trade but not to interfere with others. And to make selective alliances is no better. If country A needs Americas support against country B and we help them, then a couple of year's later country A becomes oppressive ... Where is our integrity? Because we HELPED country A become oppressive and its our fault that they were able to oppress country B and country B will blame us for that, so now we incite hatred and now we've made and example of ourselves. Selective alliances don't work, nice try though. Even if country
A doesn't become oppressive we still incite hatred because we used force to persuade change to force somone elses ideals of whats "better" onto a people when you use force to persuade change that's what happens and not only that, now those people in country B whose family died by and American hand will always resent America.

Ignorance is the bane of the human race. It is very counterproductive and it's destructive. When one speaks out of ignorance of a subject to a friend, family member or to the public as a whole and they make assumptions without any real fact other than their conclusion of the matter and consider them to be facts they mislead those to who they speak of the subject. Any conclusion that can be made out of ignorance should be considered wrong. And those that are spoken to be at fault as well because they don't bother to do the research to find the truth in the ignorance.

Sent by Nalei | 8:47 PM | 5-17-2008

Thank You for having Ron Paul on air.I realize you had him on before, but as someone else stated, too little, too late.It's not even a matter of whether or not you had him on air. I have been very disappointed in the past year as I listen to NPR for 1 1/2 hrs every morning on my way to work. In ALL the political discussions, ALL the reporting or primary results, ALL the discussion of the debates, rarely if EVER did your correspondents, and reporters even MENTION Ron Pauls name. While the internet BUZZED with horror at how Ron Paul was treated in most of those debates, While the T.V. media rushed to edit out the common sense answers Ron Paul gave,while he stood by quietly and was relegated to 3rd world status and excluded from debate with "the big boys", YOU NPR said NOTHING. THAT speaks for itself.

Sent by Sashia | 1:34 AM | 5-18-2008

Thank you NPR for your interview of Congressman Ron Paul, champion of our sacred Constitution and a principled public servant.

Sent by Jose | 12:10 PM | 5-18-2008

After hearing the latest interview with Dr./Rep. Paul, I was surprised at finding out that there are really too many people that don't know that the federal govt. has three branches, nevermind what they do.

Sent by Stephen Mosefski | 10:22 PM | 5-18-2008

Question for Ron Paul: Respectfully, with only 3 quarters of the 2008 presidential race complete, why are you not extending your presidential race and widening the exposure to your fantastic views to an even larger audience, by not running 3rd party with someone like former "R", Bob Barr? Our nation is near total moral and financial bankruptcy, yet you remain as you have over a 20-year Congressional career, as a Republican, though you are a life-time member of the Libertarian Party. Would not a Paul-Barr 08 ticket be the juxtaposition required to bring your ideas to the masses? Not continuing to fight, in the context of a presidential election when millions and millions will be listening, is a near defacto admission that the country is irreparably lost. Is it not time, sir, to rise above party, even if you wanted to save it? If you dont force the R-party to capitulate by running at it with your competing views, it will return next time with a revised public-relations gimmick that will hoodwink some of the republican party, but will continue the same corrupt cycle of special interest politics that will destroy this country. Is that not so, sir?

Sent by Paul Farris | 5:31 AM | 5-19-2008

The other two parties need to listen to Rep Paul. I will be in Mpls and at the Ron Paul Rally. I will write him in or vote Independent. I will NOT vote for McCain, Obama or Clinton.

Sent by Michael Hines | 9:41 AM | 5-19-2008

If you don't continue with an independent presidential run would you endorse Bob Barr for president.

Sent by Don | 10:44 PM | 5-19-2008

The interviewer tries to catch Rep Paul in bold statements he makes but it is the interviewer looking consistently foolish.
Some commentors above rehash the same main stream media garbage that is clearly defined on Rep Paul's campaign website. Isolationism is not non interventionalism. Rep Paul's policies are for shrinking the US empire in order to save $$ and restore Constitutional law. Diplomacy, free trade and commerce with all nations is NOT isolationism. There are still those ignorant americans that think we need our military all over the world telling others how to live and then throw their hands up in wonder when we are attacked for occupation of foreign lands.
The Constitution was defined to LIMIT federal government power. We live in a nation where the federal government has done nothing but grow at the expense of our freedom. The Constitution was written by the intelectuals of the day for all men. It should be read very literally most specifically that all powers not not given to the federal government in the Constitution belong to the people.

Sent by tom | 9:55 AM | 5-20-2008

Dear NPR: It's always nice to hear a respectful (albeit somewhat misinformed) interview with the good Dr. Paul. It warms my heart to hear any amount of airtime given to promoting the principles of individual liberty and constitutional authority. For the naysayers out there, I would humbly implore: We've tried it YOUR way, how 'bout we give Dr. Paul a try.

Sent by Heidi | 3:37 PM | 5-20-2008

I'm wondering if NPR just won't let comment's through with links, or if the problem is I was pointing out how skewed NPR's coverage is.

Google gop fox debate mara liasson site:npr.org and find her coverage of the 10/21/2007 debate.

Then look up Ron Paul in that debate on Youtube.

Mara Liasson didn't even mention Ron Paul's name even though he won the text polls, making Sean Hannity mad.

I believe Mara Liasson is unethical and has no business covering political debates.

Sent by Amy Moreno | 8:50 AM | 5-22-2008

What happened to the interview?

Sent by Jim D | 3:32 PM | 5-22-2008

NPR, in spite of your May 15 interview with presidential candidate Ron Paul, you have done what other media channels have also done....you have DRASTICALLY UNDER-REPRESENTED Dr. Ron Paul. HEAR THIS: PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT DR. RON PAUL.

He may be the most integrity-filled candidate since Abraham Lincoln. Undoubtedly, Paul is 2008's ONLY brutally honest, truly conservative, NON beat-around-the-bush candidate. He's been brave in the face of ridicule; he's shown unwavering loyalty to the United States Constitution--what ever happened to operating the government according to the Constitution???

A look at Paul's voting record is persuasive evidence of his clean political character. During interviews, he straight-talks, not side-steps. He appears to be clear-thinking and immensely KNOWLEDGEABLE about foreign policy and monetary policy, two critical, if not dire issues.

That said, your LACK of "Ron Paul" coverage indirectly lumps you in with the rest of the greed-poisoned media entities. All of you contribute to the demise of national leadership. Without truthful, BALANCED information, people are ignorant.

Even if Ron Paul is not listed on the November ballot, I will be WRITING IN his name for President. His influence will reach much farther than the mere presidency. Ron Paul is leading a new peaceful revolution--a revolution I pray will save this nation from peril.

Sent by Cassandra Bachrach | 11:34 PM | 6-2-2008

Question for Ron Paul: What would you say to a staunch contributing "conservative" supporter, who gives her 51- year old working son, a lawyer, a member of the "Constitution Party," hundreds of thousands of dollars as a "loan" from his inheritance, despite the fact that he has discharged hundreds of thousands of dollars of his personal debt to the taxpayers twice, in a 2001 Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and five years later in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

Despite the fact that her son has no durable goods to show for discharging his debt and the hundreds of thousands of dollars he "borrowed" from his mother, your staunch supporter continues to hand out cash to her son, as well as buy him cars and computers, to name a few higher priced items. Doesn't this strike you as behavior against the principals of self- sustaining government and personal responsibility that you advocate? What would you say to this mother?

Sent by Liz Lasorte | 11:38 AM | 7-7-2008