the next coolidge

The comments for Libertarian themed blogs when they touch on Ron Paul are often pretty funny.  Take, for instance, this sentence.

Ron Paul introduced me to Liberty.

He’s running in 2012.  It looks like.  Rand will float about a run, or feignt a run, if his dad doesn’t run.  None of which adds to this:

Ron Paul is a serious candidate this time. It may take the national media a while to realize it, but when he hits the ground running with a few five-million-dollar money bombs before the debates, runs national TV ads touting his record, and wins the Iowa straw poll, everyone will know.

My fellow Connecticut For Liebermann members may disagree with me on this, but Ron Paul is good for America in my opinion. He gives laughter to normal people and a harmless outlet for the seriously deranged, a political Mr. Bean of sorts.

As a frustrated ’08 contributer, is the Paul campaign going to have adult supervision this time?

Mitch Daniels would be the perfect compromise candidate in my opinion.

I think a Daniels/Johnson ticket would attract a hell of a lot of moderate Democrats as well.

Any reason?

Actually, the more interesting comments come in over here, about Rand singular.

“just maybe we’ll get someone in office with some principles for the first time since Jefferson.”

Hey, I’d take a Grover Cleveland or a Calvin Coolidge

I would be cool with just a succession of William Henry Harrison’s for eternity.
*bell ring* “NEXT!”

You could leave an honorary empty chair.

And the comment that draws my attention:

Example of an insane, yet unfortunatley common response I encountered among liberal arts majors: “Well, Britt, Coolidge was probably a racist, so anything he said and did (even if it was a simple truth like the sky is blue) should be discounted outright, and his name should never be mentioned again in any positive capacity.”
Extrapolating their logic, any president, leader, philospher, or politcal figure before JFK was on par with Hitler and/or slave-whipping boogeymen.

I call b.s.  Nobody is talking about Calvin Coolidge.  And if they are, if this commenter sees to it to interject Coolidge at every conversing opportunity, why would these liberal arts majors go to the “probably a racist” card (do they discuss his silence on the klan or –?)  and not the more frequented “Slept through a false bubble of an illusionary and half baked prosperity” route?

Leave a Reply