They will just ignore and ridicule him or whoever is carrying the banner, again, another media blackout. The banksters and the establishment have a vested interested in keeping the patient sick, and will do exactly what they did this cycle, a media blackout, call him names, etc. It worked once, it will work again. If need be they will scare us all with dreadful stories about how we will lose our hot water if the banksters and their pals can't drive their imported cars and have $400,000 parties celebrating their domination over "main street" (i.e. the tax burdened debt slaves who are getting fucked). And that isn't even considering how badly anyone speaking his message will be savaged by the lobbies of our various "Stalwart Allies" and "Special Interests", because without the central bank's magic money it is harder to cut the corporate welfare checks and spread the Dictatoraid.

All that is assuming there even is another election cycle or a 2012America that would be recognizable to us.

I don't think he should be running for president when he's 77. It doesn't mean that his ideas won't show up in 2012.

When Ron Paul says "we," he's not talking about a future run for the presidency. He's talking about the Campaign for Liberty and the efforts to actually make a difference in this country and in politics.

www.campaignforliberty.com

so there will be no need to elect him.

From your article:

"and whoever is elected President of the United States is going to play a very large role in determining the contours of the new global regulatory system."

I am a non-American reader of Salon. I have no power to select the next US president. Therefore, the above statement worries me greatly. If a move toward a global financial system comes to pass, can a global government be far behind it? When better to make changes that are unpalatable to the common man than when he/she is struggling for survival?

The President of the United states has a lot of power, but as a big player setting the agenda for the entire global financial system... Wow!

Choose your next president with great care!! The world is watching and a lot hangs in the balance.

Lord knows where we'll be in 2012. But it can only be a good thing, should we have an incumbent Democratic administration, for the right to split whatever remains of their vote. Say, Palin can run as the candidate of the Rovian base, and Paul (or some younger acolyte) can grab the libertarian votes, and then the Democrats can get on with the actual business of government.

I distrust those words in the mouth of anyone of a libertarian bent. What "Freedom" usually seems to mean is freedom to lie, cheat and steal. Freedom to write deceptive contracts and usurious loans and the freedom of a rich man to force his idea of fair wages and labor conditions on a poor one. And "Liberty" is the liberty of whoever this libertarian is trying to cheat to enter into any sneaky, one sided contract that he is foolish to sign. As long as libertarians say Freedom and Liberty and mean Caveat Emptor and "I got Mine" they can take their politics somewhere else. Freedom for the huckster needs to be balanced by the freedom to call shenanegans and run the bastard out of town.

Bretton Woods 2 is a great idea except for one thing- Bretton Woods 1 also ended in magnificent failure. Nixon went off the gold standard to prevent complete national bankruptcy.

The combination of that track record and those supporters should give progressives pause before they hop on this bandwagon.

Do we need new systemic infrastructure in place? Absolutely. New ideas? Without question.

But do we need Ron Paul economics? Well, it's worth remembering that it is basically the economic system that Dickens used to write about.

And Obama will be more than happy to take up the task of selling out the People to them. He already has, since he voted for and supports bailing out the banksters that got us where we are.

The party called America is over, and Obama will be there to lead us off the cliff into the pit of unaccountable global government, controlled at the top by shadowy, unaccountable banksters.

Obama Top Fundraiser on Wall Street

Big Banks' Employees Gave Senator $479,000 in 1st Quarter

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041701688.html

Democrats are darlings of Wall St.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/21/nation/na-wallstdems21

Bundlers for McCain, Obama Are Among Wall Street's Tumblers

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/bundlers-for-mccain-obama-are.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7_YFKyhQMI

It remains to be seen what percentage of the vote the Third party gets this time around, since they remain fragmented. I believe they should get over 10% of the popular vote combined, despite the Media ignoring them. It also looks like McCain Palin will go south of 40% which suggests a repeat of the Bush/Clinton/Perot election.

In Cal49, Issa, there are three candidates on the ballot for Rep., the Greens didnt' bother to field a candidate. In this area and I suspect in the country, a large number of Republican swing voters are independent, and that means leaning toward Libertarian.

Paul would appeal to that group. I am very curious to see how Issa does, since he took a stand against the bailout package, and Libertarians were also against that. Perhaps if the Lib candidate splits the vote, the Dem can get a bit closer than their usual 33%.

The new State Rep Chair banned independents from voting in their primary, which is an interesting dynamic. McCain had it wrapped up early, but four years from now who can say. The economy will probably be in a lot worse shape by then, and fiscal responsibility will be an acceptable platform.

It failed because the US government lacked the discipline to put systemic needs above national ones, and Nixon wanted to get reelected by futzing with the economy. America set up the system, had all the levers of power, then forget that with great power comes great responsibility. Whereas British governments were in the 19th and early 20th centuries prepared to take economic hits for the benefit of a global economic system that favored them, the US never seems able to put its money where its mouth is and assume leadership when domestic concerns are at stake. The global economy built on the dollar has such huge benefits for America that a serious recession is a price worth paying to keep it intact. But the politicians just don't get this fact, and one day, when the dollar falls off its pedestal and we have to export in order to import, they will curse the men who didn't take one for the team.