Ron Paul, Candidate of the Insane
- Posted by Beth on October 27th, 2007 filed in 2008 election, Candidates, General, Internet, Moonbats, Paultards, Politics
Just so ya know, credit for finding the Alex Jones payment from Ron Paul, if you’re here from Hot Air or Captain’s Quarters, goes to one of my anti-Paul/anti-troofer friends at digg, COINTELPROAgent (a facetious name to bait the troofers, if that’s not obvious). You’d be surprised how much information you can find out (i.e. FEC violations, among other things) just by reading the nonsense the Paultards spew over there.
I’m on a mission to clean up the internets, if you haven’t noticed. I’m reeeeally sick of the RP spammers.
If Ron Paul is going to get a spot at the debates and be treated as a serious candidate by the mainstream media, people need to know who his fellow travelers are. Think about it: in a theoretical (and it is theoretical, because RP will never be nominated, much less elected) Ron Paul presidency, would Alex Jones have a seat at the adults’ table? Secretary of Defense, even? Certainly no “neocon” (anyone who doesn’t agree with Ron Paul) would be there; only a purist would. How about Pat Buchanan as Secretary of State? Or what about Alex Jones or Pat Buchanan as VP? (Obviously, Pat Buchanan is about as good as it could get and is not comparable to Alex Jones, but he’s still a divisive, distasteful character, to put it mildly.)
Ron Paul might not agree with Alex Jones about all the batshit crazy conspiracy theories, but there’s a whole lot more on which they do agree. Would Ron Paul waste American tax dollars and time with ridiculous investigations into “who did 9/11″ because he owes troofers for their support?
He’s a crank, a troll, a cult leader. As far as I’m concerned, he has no business in the Republican debates or the Republican polls. He does not support the Republican Party platform, or even the Republican candidate should he not win the nomination (which he won’t). He is not going to win, and his presence is merely trolling, disruption, distraction, and offensive to anyone who values the political process. He’s merely using the GOP to lend legitimacy to his ridiculous charade–he ought to run third party, but he won’t because he NEEDS the Republican Party to bring attention and money to him. People like me are the Republican base–not the John Birch Society-type kooks on the far, far right–and I say he has no place in the GOP. This tent may be a “big tent,” but as far as I’m concerned, it’s not big enough for conspiracy theorists, white supremacists, Holocaust deniers, or candidates who depend on their support. They can call themselves “the real conservatives” all they want, but it won’t make it true.
UPDATE: As I said, the like-minded. Pat Buchanan, too! (Anyone surprised by this? Not me!) And more Nazis!
UPDATE 2: It’s been brought to my attention that $1300 of Alex Jones’ $2300 contribution was REFUNDED. FEC information here.
xLIVEWIREx says:
All this misinformation and lack of understanding comes from someone who blindly follows the neocon establishment candidates. Who’s the brainwashed, as this misinformed SHEEPLE shouldn’t throw stones.
The Republican party has been hijacked by warmongering big government neocons. Ron Paul is the true conservative, just compare his positions and voting record to frauds like Ghouliani and Fred “Lazy’ Thompson. Flip-Flopping Twit Romney ain’t much better, and Mike Huckabee is style and no substance.
Don’t let the SHEEPLE and the bought and paid for establishment media trick you! Research Ron Paul, GOOGLE Ron Paul…
FZappa says:
[I've already responded to your spammed comments at all the other blogs you're trolling with your copypasta comments. Spammy trolls warrant banning.
--The Management™]
Beth says:
xLIVEWIREx:
Thank you for proving my point. You even got all the key Paultard troofy words in there! Congratulations, psycho cultist!
Pirate's Cove says:
Ron Pays Major 9/11 Twoofer…
First we had Ron Paul taking money from Don Black, a new-Nazi/white supremacist and founder of Stormfront.com. Now, via Hot Air, we find out even more deplorable behavior by the Ron Paul. Kudo’s to Beth at MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy for gett…
William Teach says:
Why do Ronulans sound exactly like the leftards? Their talking points are erily similar.
FZappa says:
You consider it “spamming” to cut-and-paste specific responses to similar points at different blogs who make the same criticism?
That’s not spamming. There’s no reason for me to type out the exact same point at 5 different sites if they all make the same point and my counterargument is the same.
The trend is so clear: the pro-Paul people want more debate, the anti-Paul people want to close debate off.
mRed says:
“The trend is so clear: the pro-Paul people want more debate, the anti-Paul people want to close debate off.”
It may be true that you and others of your ilk want more debate. It is also true that those of us that think Ron Paul is batshit crazy do not want RP involved in any more serious debates.
It is also true that we think being assailed as neocon warmongers, pawns of the international zionist conspiarcy, not knowing the constitution and misquoting RP (did I get them all?) is spam. We think so because even when you’re proven wrong you keep repeating the same crap over and over again.
Here’s an idea for you, shut up, sit down, learn something about America and try again when you grow up.
Alexia says:
If ROn Paul wasn’t on the stage there wouldn’t be anything to debate. There’s no real difference between any of the candidates.
The Nazi’s were socialists who stifled their dissenters and grabbed guns. Check Paul’s gun record ve Fred’s.
Then bite me.
FZappa says:
mred,
I have not been uncivil here, and yet you tell me to “shut up” etc.
I don’t see how you take the moral high ground. If you want to complain about what you say is the uncivil behavior of some Ron Paul supporters, why mirror such behavior?
FZappa says:
PS, if the war is the main issue that Ron Paul and the neocons disagree on, how do you counter the argument that, given the collapsing dollar, we can’t even afford this war?
The dollar index was 120+ in 2000, and is down to 77 today (and falling fast as countries unpeg). That means the dollar has lost ~40% of its value in only 7 years.
William Teach says:
Pretty much, since they are all coming from some central talking points site or email. None of it is original, it is the same wherever one goes.
As far as debate goes, what is to debate? Us “neocon” (like you even understand what the word means. Like with the leftards, you just throw it out for effect) generally do not bother debating people who do not write their own thoughts, and are typically Truthers.
“Never argue with an idiot. He’ll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience”
FZappa says:
William,
My points didn’t come from any site or email, they were my own. I wrote a few responses to the attacks re Alex Jones and got sick of retyping the same thing at every site so I began cutting and pasting instead. And then you call me an “idiot,” when I have not been uncivil to anyone here. How can anyone claim the Ron Paul supporters are uncivil when this is your own behavior?
Anyway, I think we see here why the neoconservative movement is shriveling and dying. There are few good arguments to be made in its favor.
Thanks for the debate. FZappa over and out, another Ron Paul supporter ready to fight for his country.
mRed says:
I’m not being uncivil, just honest.
Since, as usual, you changed the discussion, what does the falling dollar have to do with the rightness of the war in Iraq? Are you saying the economy should dictate doing what is right? If so, that isn’t a policy decision, it is a prearranged failure.
jakealope says:
“He’s a crank, a troll, a cult leader. ”
Wow, that sounds like most bloggers and Bush-a-philes. That’s right, just insult and defame someone and reject him cause he doesn’t meet your shallow conformist specs! Way to go Right Winger
mRed says:
“Thanks for the debate. FZappa over and out, another Ron Paul supporter ready to fight for his country.”
There was no debate. You just echoed what you’ve said on this site, my site and other sites and we said stop it, it’s spam.
Who are you going to fight if RP doesn’t want you to fight those sworn to kill us?
COINTELPROAgent says:
Thanks for the hat tip bama! If anyone has info on why the payment was made to AJ I’d like to hear it.
William Teach says:
Like the lefties, Ron Paul supporters would rather fight against the “neocons” (he still has no clue what it means), rather then against Islamofacists.
Sparta says:
I wonder how many RP cult pea-brains exploded when they saw the “I support Israel” banner at the top of the page?
Sparta says:
I notice none of them are denouncing the Nazis that support their cult leader–all they denounce are the so-called “neocons.” Telling, isn’t it?
By the way, who IS a neocon? Everyone at this blog has been a conservative all along–no “neo” about it.
Beth says:
Hey, Paulbots: There’s a new post up! Go look, you’ll love it!
Beth says:
FZappa:
Right. Actually, you just want to spam and get your boy attention. You don’t want “debate,” either, otherwise you wouldn’t go around shrieking about “neocons” and “sheeple” and all the other bullshit, saying that everyone who isn’t for Ron Paul is “anti-liberty” and “anti-Constitution.” What we DO want to close off are troofers, anti-Semitic libel, and spammed gibberish from clueless morons who have nothing of substance to say. You are the classic trolls, wasting everyone’s time and hijacking real discussion.
And YES, I do consider copypasta “spamming.” I always have. Check the comment policy here.
Jakealope:
My “shallow, conformist specs?” What, I’m not entitled to my own opinions? How are YOURS not “shallow, conformist” views, then? You FAIL.
Alexia:
Get a life. You must troll the internets all day and night, 24-7, because I see your inane drivel everywhere. Piss off, moron. I may just ban you because I’m tired of seeing your brainless nonsense. (And by the way, “bite me?” Pretty tough talk from behind that keyboard, huh, Butch?)
Get used to the “attacks” (the truth being told), Paulbots. The internet is sick of your stupid, crazy crap. You had your moment, but the backlash has only just begun, and it’s all downhill for you idiots from here.
xLIVEWIREx says:
“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” - Gandhi
Dedicated to SHEEPESS BETH
xLIVEWIREx says:
An original LIVEWIRE LIMERICK!
ESTABLISHMENT SUPPORTIN’ SHEEPLE
They think that they are people
The establishment supportin’ SHEEPLE
Scared, confused, and dumb
Quite frankly the SHEEPLE are SCUM
The SHEEPLE are so full of CRAP
Deserving a LIVEWIRE BITCHSLAP!
Learn to laugh SHEEPLE! Life is short!
xLIVEWIREx says:
NEOCONS GONE FISHIN’
BY LIVEWIRE
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Lieberman are on Bush’s daddies yacht, The Saudi. Bush, Rumsfeld, and Lieberman are sitting, holding their fishing poles. Cheney is standing, shotgun in hand, looking into the water.
Lieberman- Uhhh, Mr. Cheney, could you please sit down now? You’re making me a little nervous…
Cheney- Go f**k yourself Lieberman! I’m gonna shoot me a big fish if it’s the last thing I do! (fires a couple of shots into the water)
Lieberman- Ahhh, yes Mr. Cheney. I’m so sorry, please forgive me…
Bush- (stands up) I caught something! (reels the fish in)
Rumsfeld- for crissakes, why is this fish glowing?
Lieberman- it looks like a radioactive glow! Could this be the product of enviromental pollution?
Bush- Joe, why ya gotta rain on ol’ George Bush’s parade? I’m starting to see why the Democrats kicked you out!
Lieberman- OHHHH, ahhhh, sorry Mr. Bush SIR! I won’t do it again!
Cheney- God damn it! The water is so murky, I can’t see those scaly bastards! What is that goop murking up the water? I can’t shoot at what I can’t see! (Turns and looks at the others, waving his shotgun at them. They all duck to the floor)
Lieberman- (laying on the floor) it looks like chemical pollutants sir! Perhaps toxic material from offshore oil drilling!
Cheney- DOLT!!! You are treading on dangerous waters! (fires a shot at Lieberman, shoots him in the ass)
Bush- HAHHAHAHHAA! That’s what I call shooting an ass on the ass!!!!! GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Rumsfeld- You mean God bless ONLY the NEOCONS!!!
NEOCONS BURST OUT IN LAUGHTER, EXCEPT FOR A WHIMPERING LIEBERMAN, AS THE SCENE FADES…
THE END
Beth says:
Take your meds, Livewire. :eyeroll:
And just for fun, to watch your head explode:
mRed says:
Livewire,
Thank you for proving our point you witless child.
Beth says:
Livewire, neither you nor Ron Paul have a damn thing to do with Gandhi, but nice try.
More accurate, in your case:
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they hate your guts, THE END.
And by the way, quoting Gandhi does not make you Gandhi; besides, Gandhi was not inerrant, anyway.
Beth says:
Heh. He’s pretty good at it, isn’t he? Maybe he should be the pet MVRWC Ron Paul troll, because he does more to prove our points than even the most fervent anti-Ronulan could!
mRed says:
A cute little leash with a spiked collar, eh?
Gene says:
Gee, Beth’s gonna be the Net Nanny for all the lower life forms on the internet. How Talmudic.
Oak says:
The Neo-Cons (ya, you know who you are even though you say you don’t know what one is) on this string are complete MF’ing morons. Perhaps Ron won’t win, but someday you will know that he was mostly right and you dolts are completely wrong. Of course, it will be too late then. We’ll be mired in WWIII, our kids will be drafted into a pointless war, the dollar will be down the toilet, and the U.S. will be at the mercy of World Government. That’s pretty much when you’ll know you were brainwashed, probably since kindergarten, by the establishment. Not only are you Neo-Cons, but you’re also the classic Sheeple - being led around like zombies actually believing what your treasonous leaders push into that mushy gray matter between your ears. On second thought, you’re probably so stupid you’ll never realize that you’ve been brainwashed.
Beth says:
Keep talking, Paultards…you’re presenting your arguments SO well. :mrgreen:
Vote Ron Paul, defeat the Talmudic neocons! Seig Heil!
Beth says:
Excellent idea. It should be yellow, too. ;-)
Beth says:
By the way, thanks for the compliment.
COINTELPROAgent says:
Beth, are you having fun yet :-) You know you’re over the target when you start receiving flak.
L. Step says:
The anger, almost rage, which terms Ron Paul as a “candidate for the insane” is sad.
Westmiller says:
You can say whatever you please about Ron Paul, but you might want to get your facts straight first. The Paul campaign did NOT pay Alex Jones a dime.
How do I know?
If you had properly researched the FEC site, you would have discovered that the $1,300 was a refund of a prior Jones contribution:
LINK
I don’t know why it was refunded, but it isn’t hard to guess. At about the time of the refund, Ron Paul absolutely denied any interest in the Jones conspiracy patter in a FoxNews interview last month:
But, enjoy yourself.
Alex Jones gets egged by Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoKizcDzqcA
Bill
[Link to FEC site fixed. --Beth]
William Teach says:
Funny how the Paultards (I think their responses have gone beyond “Ronulans”) still cannot define “neocon.” Just to watch their heads explode even farther, I wonder if, by the classic definition of American conservatives, they are, in fact, neocons themselves.
Livewire seems to be engaging in fantasies remeniscent of serious liberal wackjobs like those at Firedoglake and the Kos Kids Konglomerate.
LindaSoG says:
Talmudic? WTF??
KenH says:
“It is also true that those of us that think Ron Paul is bat**** crazy do not want RP involved in any more serious debates.”
With the increasing amount of money that Ron Paul’s campaign is raising and the increasing attention he is receiving from the mainstream media your desire to see Ron Paul excluded from “serious debates” will not come to fruition.
Justin Buist says:
I’m guessing it will shake out as a $1,300 donation refund. I don’t see any other reason for a campaign to send money back to a donor, and Mr. Jones has donated $2,300 already.
Susan B. says:
Hi Beth,
I just wanted to say to you and COINTELPROAgent, great job! I heard that Paul has appeared on Alex Jones’ show, but paying Jones is even more damning. Jones is a complete nut and the fact that Paul is so cozy with him speaks volumes.
Somebody emailed me about Michael Medved debating a Ron Paul supporter on his show Friday. (I didn’t get to hear this myself.) According to my friend, this guy was not only a troofer, but also an anti-semitic holocaust denier who openly roots for Islamic jihadists because they are, “the only thing standing in the way of the Zionists.” Considering that “neocon” is just a code word for “the Jooooz”, this is not surprising.
BTW, I love the random gravatars that come up if someone doesn’t have gravatar. Seeing a George Bush or Fred Thompson avatar come up next to a Paulbot’s rant is just too funny for words! :-D
Philly Dave says:
Geez, why all the vitriol from the Israel first crowd towards a “third tier candidate” with “no shot”… nervous about New Hampshire?
Jean Gordon says:
Ron Paul, Candidate of the Insane?????????? I beg tour pardon. You are beginning to sound like FOX NEWS.
Ron Paul supporters are very educated in what is happening to this country.
I am a Ron Paul supporter, and I am NOT insame..thank you.
Beth says:
Westmiller:
If you look, you will see that people are merely ASKING WHY about the $1300 disbursement. Fine, they returned $1300 of a $2300 donation. I’m sure plenty will be looking to see why not all of it.
Furthermore, did I ever say Ron Paul is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist? NO. I know he is not a troofer; I’ve seen all your links, all your videos, everything your cult has spammed all over the internets. (Believe it or not, those of us who are Ron Paul detractors do know what he’s about.)
But if you look, you’ll see (and I think you know) that the 9/11 troofers are universally behind your boy, as is virtually every group that thinks everyone else is “Israel first.” It’s quite telling, don’t you think, that every group on the right–and plenty of individuals on the left–that demonize Jews and Israel are Ron Paul supporters. Extremists love him: conspiracy theorists, Birchers, anti-Semites, white supremacists. There’s a reason for that, you know–his policy positions are well-suited to them. And NO, it is NOT because he is a “Constitutionalist.” (There’s nothing “Constitutional” about white supremacism or conspiracy theories.) He is, whether you wish to admit it or not, far out of the mainstream, an extremist himself. He is a doom-and-gloom ideologue, completely disassociated from the reality of this country. He has some ideas with which I (and many if not most other conservatives) agree, but so do lots of others, even a few Democrats. I sure won’t be voting for any Democrat just because a few ideas are right, though. What’s interesting is that your cult refuses to see anything at all good in the other conservatives running. It is YOU who are blind, brainwashed, “sheeple,” as the “Livewire” lunatic above so amusingly proved.
Keep talking, Paul cultists–most of you are doing a great job proving my points that you’re extremists, deranged and/or anti-Semitic. :mrgreen:
Susan B:
I know, it cracks me up! Especially with Bush giving the thumbs-up! Heeeee! (Wait until they get the RP one with the X through it!)
COINTELPROAgent says:
Beth, the Liberty Papers linked to you and asked some good questions, now they are being eaten alive! http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/28/ron-paul-paid-911-truther-alex-jones/
OldGuy says:
I see you’ve stirred up an infestation on Ronulans with your post here…nice job.
BTW Alexia seems to believe that Ron Paul is a friend of second amendment gun rights.
From Debating Ron Paul
They ask you to learn about Ron Paul, and then when you do they don’t like it very much.
COINTELPROAgent says:
The American Thinker picked up on it and linked to you, although they call it a “payment for services” - http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/10/ron_paul_campaign_employs_loon.html
Stop The ACLU says:
Why Is Ron Paul Paying 911 Truther Conspiracy Nut, Alex Jones?…
Update: From Beth in the comments: $1300 of Alex Jones’ $2300 donation was refunded, per the FEC disclosure. (See the update to my post.)
Why only a partial refund? I’m guessing RP sees a need to distance himself from troofer scum, but not COMPLETE…
Beth says:
Thanks, Cointelpro. :) Got it.
OldGuy–great link you posted! Thanks! And you’re absolutely right; the more you know, the less you like of him.
OldGuy says:
Always willing to do my part, I’ve blogged about him and his supporters in the past but I’ve moved my blog onto my own server space so it’ll look a little sparse until I start catching up.
I really enjoy your blog BTW and keep it book marked.
Hope you won’t mind if I add it to my blogroll.
William Teach says:
Get this. On a different Ron Paul post, I had someone leave a comment as Paul Metzger, who is a major white supremacist figure. http://www.thepiratescove.us/?p=4664
Real or sock puppet?
OldGuy says:
His name links to the W.A.R. website.
Excuse me now, I have to go take a shower.
Beth says:
Not at all, and I’ve reciprocated. Thanks!
That is sickening, to put it mildly. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is him trolling blogs looking for attention. And yeah, I need to go shower now too after seeing that. I’ve been feeling quite a bit of disgust lately after lurking in the cesspools of the internet, reading how the sick filth luuuuurves Ron Paul. (Although I see Metzger does not–he hates everyone and everything.)
Buzz Blog says:
Presidential campaign nuttiness…
Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has uncovered a payment from the Ron Paul campaign to Alex Jones, the 9/11 conspiracy nut and radio talk show host. Hot Air says:
Assuming it’s the same Alex Jones, which seems a safe bet, pray tell what might t…
InRussetShadows says:
I actually see nothing wrong with the Birchers, as getting us out of the U.N. is an excellent idea. Aside from that, I completely agree with the expose` and refutation of Paul. I also find the Paulistas’ freak-out over scrutiny of Paul quite comical. What did you think would happen when you declare yourself a candidate for the presidency? Duh, guys.
alex says:
I really like Ron Paul. He’s making our party think about the direction it’s going in. He’s doing an outstanding job of raising important issues in our country and making citizens aware of what values are really important. I salute you, Ron Paul! :D
alex says:
What we truly need is a Ron Paul be in. Let’s love Ron Paul. He’s on our side!
alex says:
I’m happy that I made a contribution to the Ron Paul campaign. I’m going to contribute even more!
alex says:
I love Ron Paul. He’s the man!
alex says:
An’ Ron Paul’s real intelligent. He knows the issues. He speaks to me personally every day. I’m glad I found Ron Paul! He’s a really down to earth guy!
USpace says:
Ron Paul has some good ideas, just some that is…
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
just blame America
for all the ills of the world
don’t blame simple dictators
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
ignore the threat of jihad
SCREAM that it’s made up
an excuse for blood for oil
.
http://absurdthoughtsaboutgod.blogspot.com/
:)
.
Liberty Pundit says:
More Ron Paul Hanky Panky…
Bad enough that he’s allegedly received donations from a Nazi hate group, but now he appears to b…
Popularity: unranked [?]……
Mike says:
I think the banner in the upper left hand corner of this site says it all… Any canadte that is going to shut down support to Israel is called a Nazi or a pro Nazi or a Nazi suppoter or some other stupid twist which is meaningless.
Nazi Nazi Nazi… The witch hunt was over about 50 years ago! Quit building crosses to hang people from and use the wood to build a brige and get over it already!
Leah says:
I really don’t understand why when people talk about how they dislike Ron Paul, they always result to name calling and insults.
I’m a Ron Paul supporter, and I really don’t see anything insane or batty about wanting to get back to our Constitution. That’s really all this is about.
James D says:
The writer loves name-calling and insults. Seems to hate rational argument. Insult instead - so easy to say. Feels so good. Proves nothing.
Is this writer trying be a journalist or a fortune-teller? - “Never” - “Always” - “won’t win”? Predicting the future with such certainty resulted in huge mistakes like the quagmire of Vietnam and the quagmire of Iraq. If you’re such a supporter of these wars just shut-up and go on over there and fight yourself. Cowards stay home urging brave men to their deaths in unjust wars. Which one one you?
This ‘writer’ also loves to insult others with name-calling instead of presenting a coherent and logical argument for his own position. When you have nothing intelligent to say - when others are tired of your irrational rants - all you have left is insult.
So go ahead. Make my day. Write some more childish name-calling swill and call it journalism.
Slightly Askew says:
I have been a supporter of the “Ron Paul Revolution” mainly for the same reason I supported all the other long shot candidates. He gets people talking about issues. I have to say that I was a bit surprised, considering how much I thought I believed the same way he did, when I took several online polls and found him regularly in third or fourth place according to my beliefs. I believe that the Paul supporters are focusing on just one or two talking points against which it is difficult to argue (personal freedom, out of Iraq, etc.) However, while it would be nice to have a President who has these lofty goals (no IRS, no DoE, etc.) we also need to realize that whoever is elected will also have to make more mundane decisions.
In my opinion, the President has two major responsibilities. First, as commander in chief of the military. Paul wants to get us out of Iraq immediately, and I say good for him. As President he would have that power. But then what? He wants to bring home all the soldiers from bases throughout the world and protect our borders. Our soldiers in foreign countries serve as a deterrent. They stop dictators from overrunning their neighbors. They place us in a position so that, should the need arise, we are already near the locations we need to be. I don’t think Paul appreciates this need.
The second responsibility of the President is as a balance of power against the Congress. Here is where I think Paul’s Constitutional stance would actually be beneficial. I’ve said for years, before the Paul hysteria, that the best thing our Congress could do is stop passing so many laws. A fairly even distribution of Republicans and Democrats in the Congress, with a Libertarian leaning Republican Constitutionalist weilding the veto pen would put a stop to all the excessive and restrictive laws pouring out of Congress.
So, do I agree that Ron Paul supporters are insane? No. Sure, some of them are a bit overzealous, but I’m guessing that many of them are engaged in the political process for the first time in their lives. They’re excited, and many of them will be voting for the first time. Don’t you remember the first time you got excited about a cause? Whether it was Free Tibet, End World Hunger, Stop Pollution, Jews for Jesus, or something else, it is only natural to be a bit overzealous at first. Over time, you calm down, stop claiming that the world is going to end in a fiery garbage ball, and just start sorting your recyclables. Give the Paulites a chance to grow up.
Slightly Askew
OldGuy says:
OK James D, here’s your big chance.
Name one major piece of legislation Ron Paul has proposed and gotten passed into law.
Not the copy/paste tripe that he supposedly stands for but a real world bonifide law that has impacted and made America a better place to live.
What has he actually done in his 2 decades as a congresscritter to earn my vote to be president of the United States?
David says:
I just wanted to throw one question out there… to see what if any answers I get. I would not call myself a “troofer” by any stretch, however, from alot of the information that I have read there are many facets of 9/11 that have not been explained. I give the example that the official 9/11 report has no explanation as to why building 7 collapsed.
With the magnitude of importance this event has played in directing our countries policies both foriegn and domestic, why would anyone be against investigating it. They say knowledge is power, I don’t understand why from Bush down there has been a very real hesitancy from investigating 9/11 or why MSM and some bloggers are so vehemently and violently against people who are just calling for further investigation into what they see as unexplained facts.
Thanks
David
Slightly Askew says:
OldGuy:
Here, let me just clip and paste a few of the key words from some legislation that has been introduced or passed by Congress.
postage stamp should be issued in honor of the late George Thomas “Mickey” Leland…Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Awareness Month…Harriet Tubman should have been paid a pension for her service as a nurse…regarding the primary author and the official home of “Yankee Doodle”…Recognizing the importance of blues music, and for other purposes….commemorative postage stamp should be issued in honor of Harold Washington, the 42d mayor of Chicago…
The list goes on and on. For every useful:
Condemning the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for its failure to comply with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the U.S.-North Korea Agreed Framework of 1994
There are at least a dozen:
Congratulating the Syracuse University men’s basketball team for winning the 2003 NCAA Division I men’s basketball national championship.
I would even go as far as to argue that the House sponsors, debates, and passes no more than a dozen useful resolutions per year that are actually in line with what the federal government is supposed to be doing. I personally think someone who is trying to nip this in the bud is doing more good work than someone who sponsors the bill to recognize April as National Asparagus Month.
Slightly Askew
Beth says:
FYI, especially to first-time commenters: *Some* comments get auto-moderated, and I may not get to them right away this morning. If your comment doesn’t show up right away, don’t get pissed–I’ll get to it. I don’t delete comments except in rare cases.
James D says:
OK Old Guy,
So you want legislation that has been proposed AND passed into law by having BOTH houses of Congress pass the bill AND the President NOT vetoing it AND that has made America a better place to live? That’s a tough order. If congress, the senate and the presidency were filled with just, good and ethical politicians that might happen. What a good man is left with is proposing good bills. One good proposal and 500 bought and paid for politicians voting their masters’ wills won’t pass too many bills that are good for the people and bad for special interests.
But let’s look at some bills that have been passed. Do they pass your test of ‘making America a better place to live?
- Creation of the Federal Reserve
How’s the US dollar doing these days? Is the Fed busy right now printing more money out of thin air and devaluing your hard earned US dollars? You bet they are. Ron Paul proposes abolishing this blight on US money. Can he count on your support?
- The War vs. Iraq (Korea, Grenada and any war after WWII)
Wait now! Where was the legislation passed by congress to engage in these wars? The Constitution demands that only Congress declare war? Can’t find a declaration of war ANYWHERE?
So here’s YOUR challenge Old Guy. Name one war after WWII that has been declared by Congress in compliance with its duties under the Constitution.
James says:
“Here’s an idea for you, shut up, sit down, learn something about America and try again when you grow up.”
Learn something about America? You mean, like read the documentation that was provided by the founders at the time of its creation? Pretty sure Ron Paul has, what about those other candidates? Would Rudy be able to paraphrase any part of it other then the first few lines? When you take any political office you have to SWEAR to defend the constitution and I bet the majority of them don’t even know its contents outside of a few choice amendments and some of the Bill of Rights.
Many call the constitution outdated by the advances in military weaponry. That there would be no current day possibility for survival of this country if we were to actually conform to the original ideals of what it was to be an American. Yet the majority of this fear is perception. You don’t think that in the small colonies we had at the countries outset that there weren’t so-called “super weapons” that could obliterate an entire settlement. They were as fearful of a single British ship then as we are today of a single atomic weapon … but they did not let that fear dictate or limit their freedom as we have today. Yes, the cities are larger now and the weapons have grown more powerful to accomplish the same ends, but the fear back then was the same and it really is fear that is driving Americans to give up their freedoms.
Our founders warned us of the dangers of entangled alliances. Not because it sounded cool to write on a piece of paper, but because they knew from experience that it DOES NOT WORK. Do you really think that the problems we have today with extremism and terrorists are somehow brand new to this day and age? That barbarian, savage, and all the medieval terms for terrorists are the product of fantasy novels? And you dare tell us that WE have things we need to learn?
“Since, as usual, you changed the discussion, what does the falling dollar have to do with the rightness of the war in Iraq?”
When you can just ask the federal reserve to print you some more money because you don’t feel the need to bother congress or the American people by showing them the bill and explaining why, exactly, you need more money … then how can you honestly say that the Iraq war doesn’t have a direct affect on the falling dollar?
Aaron Kelley says:
What’s with all the logical fallacies? Just because someone is America first does not make them anti-Israel. I won’t classify myself as a blindly following candidate supporter, but I will counter false-logic arguments. Though it is true that RP has received some support from less than respectable groups and individuals, (that’s pushing it I admit, but I don’t like resorting to name calling) I think it is more of a tell that he is a candidate that has an appeal to such a broad base. All of the ant-RP articles and blogs I have seen to date attempting to dig up dirt on his supporters have been fairly narrow-minded and have failed to show a direct correlation between a candidate’s beliefs and his supporters’ beliefs. If we were to take a microscope to every candidate out there, there are less than desirable supporters for each and every one. It’s a fact of life when we live in a free-speech society that there will be individuals who voice their beliefs and opinions that directly counter what we believe to be decent and moral in society. This doesn’t mean that because they choose to support their candidate of choice that “said candidate” is in agreement with that supporter’s ideals. I will admit that some supporters have been a bit over-zealous in their support of Ron Paul and it has detracted from his candidacy. Those few that are “spammers” as it has so eloquently been put are small in numbers when compared to the larger majority of his supporters who tend to not comment at all. Please don’t “guilt by association” those who would counter with logic and reason with the minority.
To counter accusations that RP is anti-Israel, I offer the following LINK. Did you know he supported Israel’s action against the Osirak reactor when practically everybody, including the Reagan Administration condemned Israel. He has a number of Jewish supporters who actually see his stance for what it is. Ron Paul wants to end subsidies of all kinds, not just to Israel. He feels it is in everyone’s best interest to take this course of action. To quote a Chinese Proverb “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.” RP does actually support Israel, he just believes (correctly in my opinion) that American’s shouldn’t be required to support it monetarily.
Though admittedly, any course of action in politics will demand compromise, isn’t it better to have someone who starts out closer to the best interests of the people he represents than to concede immediately and give in without a fight. I like RP if only from the standpoint of being different from the ever present sameness that has been American Politics over the last 20 years.
Crackerjaxon says:
I am pleased that the toadies for the Rudy-Thompson-Romney-Bush crowd have emerged from the shadows to attack Ron Paul. The fact that the best they can do is call people Ronulans and Paultards speaks volumes about them. Following the tactics of leftist propagandists, they are now seeking to associate Paul with white supremists, 911 truthers, and whatever unwholesome influences they can dig up. They cannot and do not discuss the issues facing us. Instead, like the good toadies they are, they call for Paul to “denounce” people. It’s wonderfully funny and downright Kafkaesque. The only thing stopping them from being a musical comedy is a lack of musical talent.
OldGuy says:
So exactly what does all that obfuscation have to do with the original question I asked James D?
Not all the congresscritters are running for president, this discussion is about Ron Paul.
Take your Ritalin and focus.
I asked you what has Ron Paul done for America to deserve my vote, not a list of meaningless bills.
Provide me with real life examples of Ron Paul’s statesmanship, what bills has he gotten passed that reflect his “constitutional” leanings. Explain to me how he used his prowess and abilities as a congressman to pass legislation that is good for America.
Lets see if you can do it without meandering all over the south forty….K?
Last chance dude.
Aaron Kelley says:
And for the record, just because someone is anti-war, doesn’t make them anti-defense. RP has been quoted over and over again about his desire to build up our defenses. Why fight them over there when you don’t have to fight them at all. That’s another logical fallacy that has been thrown out time and time again. Even our own CIA and 911 reports have shown that 9/11 occurred because of blow-back. This does not “guilt by association” the general American populace, however terrorists attack targets of opportunity. Just because the government has been creating policies that incite and even illicit anti-America hate speech in the past does not mean that we have to stay that course and continue to irritate the region. Admittedly, it’s going to take a long time for the hostilities to die down after everything that’s happened over the last couple of decades, but don’t fool yourself into thinking that by continuing fighting and occupation in the region will make everything better. The only way to let a wound heal is to stop picking at it. Short of nuking the entire middle-east, we’re not going to solve their problems and make them play nice with each other. In a perfect world, all men (and women of course, but I’m generalizing) would respect one another. In their eyes, we are the bad guys and they are the one’s with the moral high-ground. Sure, they may feel that we are sinners in their eyes, but honestly, aside from a few zealots (we have plenty of our own religious zealots) no middle-eastern nation would ever take on the United States. The best we can do is secure our borders, build up our defenses, and pay attention to our own problems first. This is not an isolationist viewpoint, it’s a sovereign one. We should dictate our own policies, both economic and foreign for what is best for our own interests first. I guarantee you other countries are going to do what’s best for their people first.
Sorry if this sounds a bit off-topic, but it seems that constantly, RP supporters are branded as being pacifist isolationists who want anarchy and pot. If you’re not for the war, then you’re a 9/11 Truther. Logical fallacies abound when discussing politics. How about we stick to the actual debate on both sides and quit using words like neocons, fascists, socialists, liberals, etc. in an attempt to actually discuss the problems that exist. And for those of you who say there’s nothing wrong with America and if you don’t like it leave, get a life. Being able to voice a difference of opinion is the thing that makes America truly great. Sometimes we can only agree to disagree and it should be left at that. Name calling benefits nobody on either side and should be left to children on the school-grounds where it belongs.
Course that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Alex Ritz says:
President Paul, ahhhh it sounds so good… so good.
OldGuy says:
OK here’s an issue.
I have asked a realist, clear and coherent question and have yet to get an answer.
Ron Paul has been in the congress for 2 decades, what legislation has he gotten passed that deals with or solves any of the issues?
Beth says:
“Jews for Ron Paul?” What, are there three of them? Maybe five? (Did you notice that being Jewish isn’t a requirement to join?)
Hey, how about I put up a website saying…I dunno, “Jews for Beth?” Maybe I’ll make a site called “Paleocons for Giuliani!” HA!
Please.
Anyway…To those of you crying (waaah!) about my reference to Nazis in the post, CLICK THE LINK. If you still defend the scum I referred to as “Nazis,” then you aren’t welcome here. Fine, they may not formally be in a Nazi party, but they’re of the same mindset. SEE FOR YOURSELF. Go ahead, defend that trash.
Aaron Kelley says:
Oldguy
I see your point, but alas, you’re making false logic. Just because one Mr. Smith has not had the ability to make monumentous changes in Congress does not make him irrelevent. If anything, I think it goes further to show the overall mess that is our current political arena that we have grown to accept. Aren’t we told that every vote counts? Being the sole voice of opposition at least accomplishes the point of there being opposition. A president has much more sway than a lone congressman ever would. I’m more interested in what he would veto as President than what he would pass as a congressman. You are trying to build a false logic case against the very point of his platform. RP is against many of the social programs, big governement spending, and federal intrusion on local and private matters. The very fact that he has not produced any of these as a congressman goes miles towards his credibility for advocating small federal governement.
Slightly Askew says:
OldGuy:
Ok, I’ll bite. I know what you want to hear. “Ron Paul has not had a single bill he has sponsored passed”. There, let’s get that out of the way so you can keep reading with an open mind.
However, what you call “obfuscation”, I call getting to the heart of the matter. You personally believe that the number of bills that a rep. has gotten passed is a reflection of their success. I disagree, as do many other people. I am not calling you names or insulting you. I’m simply saying that we differ on how we view the success of a US Rep (warning “meandering all over the south forty” to follow) in the same way that football fans say Dan Marino cannot be considered a successful quarterback because he never won a Super Bowl. People have different ideas on what makes a person a success, and, regardless of what you or I may think, the only people that matter in this case are a few thousand in Texas that are represented by Ron Paul. It is not his job to pass legislation that is “good for America”. It is his job to fight for his constituents, while following the rules set down in the Constitution. That is what a Representative does, he represents the ideas of the people in his own district who elected him. You say he needs to have “gotten passed [bills] that reflect his constitutional leanings”. That is what you believe. Perhaps the people of his district believe that his steadfast adherence to the Constitution when voting is what he needs to be doing. They’re the ones that have reelected him.
What Ron Paul has done for America is simple. He represents the people who elected him, while strictly following the guidelines set down in the Constitution. Today, he represents the few thousand people who elected him to do so. As President, he would do the same thing. Recognize the beliefs of those who voted for him and preside according to those beliefs, all the while using the Constitution as his guide. If you want a guide to follow, look at all of the times he has voted no on a bill, and the reasons behind that vote. Now, imagine that his no votes suddenly had the power of Presidential veto. Do you think that would be a good thing or a bad thing? If you think that the times he has voted no, he has been wrong more than he has been right, then by all means, don’t vote for the man. However, if you look at all the times he has voted no, and think the country would be a better place if that no vote had the power of a Presidential veto, I recommend giving him a chance.
Slightly Askew
MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy says:
Why Jew-haters love Ron Paul…
There are plenty more reasons why anti-Jewish thugs love Ron Paul, but this is just a start. From the 110th Congress:
H CON RES 21
BILL TITLE: Calling on the United Nations Security Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violatin…
James D says:
Old Guy,
You have an answer. You just don’t like it. Demanding answers is easy. Try answering one yourself. You don’t pass legislation all by yourself. You propose good legislation and try to get 500 other legislaators to agree with you. Passing bad legislation has been easy - special interests controlling their politician puppets ensures that. Ron Paul wants to change all that. As President he will veto bad legislation and anything that violates the constitution. That’s one reason he is running. One congressman can only do so much. One President has enormous power. President Ron Paul will finally use that power for good. A million dead Iraqis should tell you how the current President has used that power for the past 7 years.
So here’s YOUR challenge again Old Guy. Name one war after WWII that has been declared by Congress in compliance with its duties under the Constitution. Or aren’t you up for that challenge? Come on, be a good sport. It’s such an easy question. Anyone should be able to answer it in 30 seconds. I’m waiting.
OldGuy says:
Why is it false logic?
If the guy is such an upstanding and respected member of congress you would have thought he could have used some of that capital to get something done wouldn’t you?
He’s a do nothing congressman who would be a do nothing president, that don’t solve problems or correct issues. That’s just another Jimmy Carter…and who needs that?
Aaron Kelley says:
Beth, I’m trying to have a logical debate and instead, you take to a mocking tone and continue your false logic of guilt by association. I have no doubt that the funds from undesirable supporters will most likely be denounced and returned (or possibly donated) once they have been addressed by RP’s fundraising staff. Regardless, an individual donating to a campaign does not mean a candidate agrees with said support. I’d say the same for any candidate. The only time I view a conflict is when a significant amount of campaign funds are from sources that could have sway over a candidacy once in office. There have been many of these in past elections of other candidate that raised much more concern than a couple of individuals donating with no assocation whatsoever to Ron Paul.
Beth, get off your high horse and quit claiming to be the single voice of sound reason and logic. Debate on actual logic points with others or don’t bother. Mocking and name calling serves nobody and only lowers the intelligence of all parties involved. Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them wrong. Opinions are like a-holes. Everyone has them and nobody’s smell like roses.
Jerm says:
Perhaps I can find an answer here for a question that has been plauging me for a while:
How can a war on an intangible idea or tactic (say, I dunno, Terrorism) ever be won? I can understand how a war against Iraq or Iran could be won: clear-cut objectives and requirements outlining a victorious engagement.
Wouldn’t this be like declaring war on happiness or sadness? We can kill every terrorist that exists right now, but new ones will pop up to take their place; because terrorists are not born, they are created from good men who beleive they are doing right. (Yeah I said it, I believe those guys actually believed that they were doing God’s work, even if I don’t believe that).
If China had invaded us like we did to Iraq, how long would it take you before you threw up your hands in defeat? How much chaos would they have to create before you decided that dying to attain freedom for your country is better that living under an opressive thumb? I for one would gladly lay down my life in defense of my country. If China invaded and did to us what we are doing to Iraq, it wouldn’t take long for me to strap some c-4 to my chest and try and take as many of ‘them’ out as possible.
Sorry for rambling, but again: HOW CAN A WAR ON TERRORISM (intangible) BE WON?
Don Conner, TM says:
When you Folks who choose to call us (Ron Paul supporters) conspiracy nuts, have gone to the effort to source and disprove (at the source) point by point, the claims that the United States of America is following an agenda of systematically removing our rights as warranted under the Constitution for the united States of America, you are no better than those you denigrate with your symbolism over substance commentary. My challenge: Research what you critique, rebut it point by point and prove your position. Till then, you are the very substance of that which you mindlessly criticize.
Aaron Kelley says:
OldGuy
Again, you are trying to say that simply being a voice of opposition where there should be is of no relevance. I think Slightly Askew stated it pretty much to the point above. I think we need more like him, not less. Congress is getting bills passed (as you seem to think is all important) for things they should not even be dealing with. Federal Government is not the end-all be-all solution to problems and only further goes to complicate things and increase spending for the individual. There is a time and place for major issues that affect all citizens, but by and large Congress is passing bills that should not exist. Don’t compare a single congressional seat with the office of the presidency. Admittedly Jimmy was a fairly lame duck president, but he did nothing to keep the Congress in check either.
Admittedly, anyone who thinks that Ron Paul getting into the White House will solve all of the nation’s problems is delusional, but I still feel it is a step in the right direction. Saying that one man can’t make a difference so why bother just further adds to the problem and continues down the same path to destruction.
On a side note, I think Ron Paul in the debates actually gets the candidates to discuss something other than continued blind support of a war that will not end. Before anyone starts lambasting me with the “you’re with the terrorists” crap, please actually look at the quagmire that it is Iraq and realize that it’s only going to continue. There will never be stability in the region so long as we try to dictate it. I’m all for punishing the individuals who perpetrate the atrocities against Americans, but we are over there fighting against a guerrilla war. All we are doing is causing more problems for the individuals who live there, getting ourselves further in debt and more unpopular throughout the entire world. We should lead by example, not by force.
Slightly Askew says:
To those who have read my posts:
I found this website off of a google link and did not bother to research it before debating with the posters here. I was not aware of the hateful opinions of the author and some of the contributors, and I regret not doing my research on a site before contributing. I firmly oppose the belief that anyone who doesn’t support Israel is a “Jew Hating Nazi”. This kind of inflammatory talk may be good for ad revenue, but does little to foster quality debate. Good luck to the rest of the reasonable people on this site.
To the author: If I have misunderstood your stance, you have my email. Please feel free to correct me and I will gladly retract my statement.
Slightly Askew
Sk00L says:
LOL holy scared people batman! So it has come to this name calling, trashing, and bashing? w0w the psychology of this post is astounding! Sure people fear change and lash out when presented with it and grasp for whatever argument best protects them from having to confront and actual change that makes them think. Even more astounding are the lack of actual facts or research that a balanced mind with integrity might portray. Instead this poster has resorted to name calling and opinion touted as some sort of truthful argument. Five years ago i might have taken a similar stance however having a thirst for knowledge i have not only found but corroborated my findings. What i have found is remarkable and is clear that a great deal of what is portrayed as truth is in fact sub version. I will not go into a diatribe about my findings or my more then opinions. And given the time to post the facts behind would most likely alter some of the Anti-Paul extremely baseline muck slinging but change (for those not too scared of change) quite a few OPINIONS that those who have already closed off their minds hold so dear. Rather then go down that path I would like to appeal to everyone on either side of the coin to continue their education and research with an open mind and not to accept small minded opinion as truth that resorts name calling and uneducated banter to make a point.
Leah says:
I just wanted to say that I am a Jew and I support Ron Paul.
It doesn’t bother me if anti-semites support him as well. Whatever their reasons are, I know what Ron Paul stands for, and I know he is a man of integrity and principle. I also know that he firmly believes in the fact that you can believe whatever you wish as long as you do not hurt another. Because of this, I don’t care if anti-semites support him.
It’s illogical to believe that because one has a support of another, one automatically believes what the other believes. If we used this as a yardstick throughout history, we’d come up with many false analogies.
Aaron Kelley says:
Slightly Askew
Though we disagree on a couple of small points, it’s refreshing to see a cool head and logic to prevail in a discussion. Thanks for your comments above and I encourage your further response in the thread as you feel so inclined.
infragreen says:
If RP was Pro-WAR- Iraq, Iran, wherever, you wouldn’t have written this blog.
Just another chickenhawk gasbag, with his panties in a twist.
The Neo-con movement is the Ugly American, and is typified in rants like yours.
America will get the President it deserves, just like it did in 00 and 04.
mitch says:
Wow are you uptight and wasting your time in hatred of Ron Paul. If nobody knows who he is, you are really an object of pity.
Just A says:
Anyone care to stop name calling and actually discuss some issues here?
protocol of zion says:
this blog proves that the zionist fear ron paul.
infragreen says:
I’ve got news for you. The reason there is so much online activity FOR Ron Paul is NOT due to spamming.
HE ACTUALLY HAS THAT MUCH SUPPORT!
Carlitos says:
Who wrote this article?? my God! either the person who wrote it has been paid by a NeoCon campaign or is just extremely dissinformed.
Why do you care so much about The Elite? their wars,… their money systems that only makes them richer,… Why? … why attack a congressman who is running for president who is only saying THE TRUTH on each debate,..(that’s why you don’t hear any powerful combacks from any candidate on the issues).
Why call a Dr who’s delivered more than 4000 babies insane??
I just don’t get it.
Dr. Ron Paul killed my apathy towards American Politics.
Nathan Hobbs says:
what makes Ron Paul such a bad republican? is this all about the pull out of Iraq line? he wants smaller federal government, less power to the executive branch, less involvement in foreign affairs, and lower taxes.
Years ago in high school I was taught that WAS what a republican was.
This year to me both the mainstream democratic and republican parties are 2 alike. Both want to spend more money, with more programs and invest more in a failing foreign policy. I strongly believe we need to step back downscale the federal government and get ready for some tougher economic times ahead and will support any Canadite that will lead me to believe he feels the same..
So far it is just Ron Paul
Beth says:
Apparently not, judging from most of the comments here (Slightly Askew being a notable exception).
It’s like “debating” any cult member–disagree, and you are the equivalent of the Antichrist, consumed with malicious beliefs and motives.
At this point, it’s not even worth my time. This is the thread for the cult to condemn the infidel!
Beth says:
No, and that’s only part of his misguided views about foreign policy, which are stunningly unrealistic in today’s world. “Less involvement in foreign affairs” is something the paleocon far-right (Pat Buchanan, the John Birch Society, etc.) is for, but not most Republicans. Please don’t assume that the only thing I know about Ron Paul’s ideology is a few lines in a few GOP debates.
I’m also against a lot of other things he’s for, whether that disagreement is in toto, or just about the degree to which he takes things (i.e., I’m for small government, but not a virtually non-existent federal government).
Apparently some in this thread think that if you don’t ascribe to paleocon ideology, you’re a socialist, a liberal, a neocon, or a traitor. Sorry, but I wholeheartedly reject Bircher/Buchanan/far-right politics, and I’m still a conservative. It is possible (and in fact, common), you know.
Aaron Kelley says:
To Ron Paul Supporters
Folks, I appreciate and feel your enthusiasm for Ron Paul, but please, let’s stick to the topic and actually debate with reason and sound logic. Doing things like mentioning his 4000 delivered babies does nothing to futher the actual conversation and only cheapens the support Ron Paul has been receiving. It’s good to see so many people interested in politics wanting to make a change from the usual party lines, but don’t fall into the trap of making logic fallacies that is all toocommon in political discussions. Every candidate has their strengths and weaknesses and we should concentrate on actual debate than resort to name calling or mud-slinging. Guilt by association, whether it’s directed toward Ron Paul or any other candidate is just a bad argument. It serves no good to go down that road and only feeds into circular logic. Save the Ron Paul chants and “Go Ron Paul” cheers for the rallies as in forums they will only fall on deaf ears. This in turn is causing it’s own blow-back against future RP support and does nothing to help his candidacy.
I state again, your support is appreciated, but only serves as fuel for opposition to say that Ron Paul supporters have no substance. If you have something valid to add to the conversation, then by all means, please do. Let logic and sound minds reign.
Alex says:
If you think Ron Paul does not belong in the Republican Party you need to go to history class. Every one of your arguments comes from shear lack of knowledge.
infragreen says:
Beth says
“No, and that’s only part of his misguided views about foreign policy, which are stunningly unrealistic in today’s world. “Less involvement in foreign affairs” is something the paleocon far-right (Pat Buchanan, the John Birch Society, etc.) is for, but not most Republicans. ”
Tell me how we need hundreds of military bases all over the world.
Tell me why we need to set up puppet governments.
Tell me why we need to bomb Iran, and why Iraq was a good idea, ( and if you say “terrorists”, don’t bother answering.)
I just don’t get it.
Beth says:
Thank you, Aaron. Your reasonable demeanor is appreciated.
Slightly Askew says:
Warning, this turned out longer than I expected.
Several months ago I was discussing/debating with some friends about the administration and the news media’s use of certain terms to stir public opinion for or against a certain belief. We were discussing guerilla warfare vs. terrorism (simple rule, if you’re from outside of the region, and fighting to stir up dissent, you’re a terrorist. If you’re from the region, fighting to protect your family and country as you feel it should be, you’re a guerilla soldier). I happened to mention that any male adult killed by coalition forces was labeled a terrorist, never a civilian casualty (e.g. 13 terrorists and 9 women and children killed, never 10 terrorists, 9 women and children, and 3 civilian men) and wondered aloud why the 9/11 hijackers were always labeled “Islamic Terrorists” instead of “Saudi Terrorists” or “Saudi Hijackers”. This guy I didn’t know very well jumped in and started saying it’s because of some super secret Saudi/Israeli/US coalition to rule the world by controlling the oil supply.
The point of this story? There are just some people you don’t really want defending your positions. Did it make my points any less true? No, of course not. Did it overshadow the point I was trying to make? Absolutely. I was associated with a nutball conspiracy theorist.
Conclusion: Ron Paul supporters, first of all, kudos to you for finding someone you can stand behind. I admire your convictions. But please, please, if you can’t construct a coherent thought, don’t know how to use punctuation and spelling, or have a closet of metallic headwear, stop openly supporting Ron Paul. You only have to look at this thread to realize the damage you’re doing to the man’s reputation. Stay calm, discuss the salient points of his campaign, and keep the conspiracy theories to yourselves. There will be plenty of time to bring them up if and when he is President. Stop making his campaign a vehicle for your personal agenda.
Second, to the Paul detractors. Understand that the vocal majority you come in contact with are not the true proponents of Rep. Paul’s agenda, no more than the abortion clinic firebombers are representative of the pro-life people or the Sierra Club are representative of the environmentalists. Just realize that extremists get more attention, and try not to lump everyone who shares a single belief into one crazy group. Ignore the crazies and politely engage the rational on the points with which you differ. You might find that we have more in common than you think.
Now, to respond to the rational people who posed questions:
Jerm: A “War on Terror” cannot be won. You have to realize that the “War on Terror” is just a term that is used for two reasons. One, it brings to mind the “War on Drugs”, something people are familiar with. Second, it allows certain individuals to use the excuse “…but we’re at war, you have to make exceptions when we’re at war”. The war on terror should really be called the “struggle against intolerant idealism”, but that’s not as catchy. Also, it has the unfortunate consequence of including some of the very people who are waging this “war”. Terrorism isn’t an ideal, it’s a method. It is a strategy of using unexpected violence against a civilian population in order to cause fear and destabilization. I won’t even bother mentioning those who have used this method in the past. You can fill in the blanks for yourself.
Nathan: Yes, that is the definition of a Republican. However, don’t make the mistake of assuming because someone runs on the Republican ticket, they are following the perfect Republican ideal. People have to weigh the issues, decide where they stand, decide which is the most important, then choose a candidate who represents those views. For example, you may be surprised to find that, as far as common issues go, I have more in common with Mitt Romney than Ron Paul. I don’t think that the free market is the end-all be-all solution to every problem. However, the fact that Romney and I agree on health care or immigration is not as important to me as our disagreement on foreign policy. Don’t make the mistake of using the regular talking point “Ron Paul is the only true conservative”. Shades of gray, not black and white, should be the rule.
I’m sure others had some good questions, but I have to go for now. To reiterate my first point, though, if you support Ron Paul, the following words should never occur in any post you make on a public blog:
- Kafkaesque, zionist, sheeple, North American Union, One World Government, “Go, Ron, Go”, neocon
Ok words:
- federal reserve, small government, foreign policy, Constitution, personal freedom
Hope this helps.
Slightly Askew
common sense says:
I would like to know why you are spending so much time investigating Ron Pauls supporters.
Are you checking into all the donations to the other candidates? I doubt it and if your not it clearly shows how you are being deceptive and are only trying to discredit a viable candidate.
Of course your all in disney land insinuating that only Ron Pauls supporters, who you state are all nuts, are the only technically savy people in the world today which means that the inverse is true of all the supporters of the other candidates.
Enough said!
Common Sense Pevails
I do this thing the government hates, its called THINKING
Slightly Askew says:
Heh, Aaron, I was writing mine while you were posting yours. Sorry to duplicate, but great minds and all that.
Slightly Askew
Chris says:
Beth,
Sorry, but Dr. Ron Paul is the true Republican, not King George. Dr. Paul has been elected to Congress for ten terms as a Republican from Texas, and he is probably the only true conservative in Congress. I would contend that King George is actually a Monarchist.
By the way, have you read the Constitution lately?
How about the Bill of Rights?
tonykarr says:
I am 66 and have been a Republican since 1976 following my Hero, Ronald Reagan. I am really fed up with the Republicans because of the spending and the incompetence of the administration. I voted for President Bush twice but I totally lost hope in the Republican Party and our government after Katrina. If we can’t fix anything in our country, we have no business to be abroad. Let’s take care of our country first, and then we can worry about others.
I think our basic problem is the waste and total incompetence of our government at all different levels. If the government was a business, it would be bankrupt within a short time. There is a lot of waste in all levels of the government including the defense department. I can imagine the waste in this department. There may be a few great thinkers and administrators in our government but they can’t make a dent to improve efficiency and productivity to better serve the people. So these good people leave the government and more incompetent groups are attracted toward government jobs.
Our federal government is just too big! And a major rework is necessary to make us “mean and lean” again. None of the current candidates in both parties fit the bill with one possible exception, namely Ron Paul. I know Ron may not be a “politician”, but he is a breath of fresh air and has great ideas such as:
1. Smaller government at all levels!
2. Reduce taxes. I know he says that he will abolish the IRS but he knows that will not happen. The IRS may evolve into some other simpler entity over time.
3. Reduce independence on the federal government and red tape. This will make us more efficient and smaller.
4. Work toward energy independence. Forget oil imports.
5. Appoint great constitutionalist judges. President Bush fortunately nominated good Supreme Court judges by accident after the Harriett Miers debacle.
6. Give more power to the States.
7. Seal our borders and take care of the USA first so something like Katrina will never happen again.
As far as Iraq is concerned, we really messed that simple war big time, from letting the Iraqi army go, not protecting their borders and help create an unworkable constitution. At this point, it is hopeless and un-winnable situation but I have a suggestion.
We need to give the Iraqi government an ultimatum to implement what they are supposed to do so that the three factions can work together to help their country, otherwise start packing the troops and our embassy staff in 90 days with no extension. We can always take care of our interest from our carriers in the region; and we have to be tough! This will actually give us a better position to vigorously defend our interest in the region without having troops on the ground.
If the Iraqi government does meet all of our demands within 90 days, we will gradually start packing to leave anyway. We will leave our embassy staff and some security personnel there.
This is a win-win situation. I think that Ron Paul will follow this line of withdrawal. You just can’t leave on a moment notice, and he mentioned it several times. He said it will take up to a year to withdraw anyway.
All my family is voting for RP and I know there are a lot of Republicans like me that will vote for Ron Paul because they are tired of big government.
Aaron Kelley says:
No problem Beth. As I always say, we can agree to disagree and let logic be the path of our discourse. That being said, though we may have fundabmental differences in the way we feel things should be accomplished in our government, ultimately it will always come down to what the majority feels should be our course of action. I have many things that I do not agree with Ron Paul about, but then again, I don’t think there is a single candidate who voices what I feel to be a 100% agreeable platform. I think both sides of the Pro/Anti Ron Paul camps have valid opinions as well as far out lunacy involved. I also feel that frankly it’s something you have to put up with in a society that condones free speech. It’s a bitch, but alas so is free will. I may not agree with what someone else says, but I’ll always defend that person’s right to say it (within limits).
I think Askew and I, small differences aside, actually represent the majority of Ron Paul’s donators and activists. As I was saying above, I do like that he seems to be getting support from all over the map. That’s one of the big concerns I’ve had in the last 3 or 4 elections, being that the divide in this country has been getting bigger and bigger with each year causing extreme hate and vitriol between people who simply have a difference of opinion.
L. Step says:
“Mud slinging”? Hey, what about “Ron Paul — Candidate for the insane”? Come on, be honest. Who’s slinging what?
infragreen says:
Logic, debate, lets all get along…blahblahblah.
Congrats Aaron Kelley, you’ve said a whole lot of nothing.
I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore. Smear my candidate?
Fuck you, I’ll smear right back.
Aaron Kelley says:
Slightly Askew
Haha, that’s ok Askew. Tis true it seems. I actually used one of those online QA surveys to see which candidate I had the most in common with, and believe it or not, I too came in with Romney. It’s funny because I feel exactly the same way you do on the very points you mentioned.
Beth, I agree with Askew whole-heartedly in his above comment. Address those who bring logic and civility to the conversation and ignore the rest.
Aaron Kelley says:
infragreen
It’s funny you say that I’ve said a whole lot of nothing when it seems that’s exactly what you’ve accomplished. I’m attempting to bring reason to the table, not meaningless slander. It does nothing for the debate for or against a candidate and only detracts from everyone involved. If you would drop the accusatory tone and actually make good discussion points, I’m sure someone will engage you to discuss. This is how you effectively persuade others, not deluge them with insults and irrelevant factoids. I’m not defending Beth or her opinions on Ron Paul, however I did come here to discuss as I felt a difference of opinion with her. In case you didn’t notice, I actually disagree with her, but that’s just our difference of opinion. By coming here to engage her with mindless insults or any of the other commentors, you merely prove her point and give her criticism credence.
infragreen, now please notice, I’m not attacking you directly or trying to mock you, I merely ask you to actually make your points in relevance to the discussion. If you disagree with the discussion or the blog, excellent! Make your case and discuss it with reason and a cool head. Name calling won’t do anything but draw ridicule and dismissal on both you and the platform you support. I don’t mean to come off as a Rodney King/Reginald Denny type saying “can’t we all just get along”, so sorry if that’s what you take away from some of my comments. I merely am trying to have a conversation with a few of the individuals on here regarding our differences.
Wild Thing says:
Beth that is a perfect title, he IS the candidate for the insane. There was an anti-war protest
rally in Boston yesterday ( Sunday). Attending the protest were truthers, socialists,communists, Ron Paul tent and his followers, Hotel Workers, code pink, Islamists, A.N.S.W.E.R.
The saying goes you are who your friends are and this is a good example of the type of people that all hang out together.
LOL oh and these were there too.LMAO
David says:
Has anyone else noticed what seems to be a recent jump in blog posts and comments by obviously vicious, stupid and racist “Paul Supporters”? To my eye these posts are so obviously destructive to Paul’s image and yet inconsistent with the posts I’ve seen from his supporters earlier. I am inclined to suspect a disinformation campaign, since it’s such an obvious ploy to create ugly “Paulistas” and inflict them on the unsuspecting, and then use the very same posts to bolster one’s own attacks on Paul by association. It’s both cowardly and unoriginal, so it seems very like the forces I’ve seen arrayed against Paul so far. Thoughts, anyone?
Beth says:
Are you serious, David? Do you find it so hard to believe that people lose their minds from behind the safety of their keyboards? There’s no need to Moby the comments, because if you were to look around the internet, you’d see plenty of the same. Basically, you’re accusing me of sockpuppeting, and you’re not only wrong, you’re dreaming. If I didn’t respect people’s privacy, I’d be more than happy to show you referral logs and IP addresses.
Go look at Stormfront or a troofer forum if you want a taste of how tame the obnoxious “Paulista” comments are, compared to how bad they can get. (Obviously, I’m not referring to the commenters here who aren’t being jackasses.)
Remember, just because a conspiracy is possible, doesn’t mean it exists. (Sorry, but I have zero patience for conspiracy theories. Zero.)
Beth says:
Wild Thing - That’s what amazes me. Bircher palecons cavorting with Code Pink and ANSWER? It just goes to show, the further you get to the extremes, the more they start to all look alike. I laughed when Red State said their RP trolls were “liberals” because they (usually) aren’t–but sometimes it’s really hard to tell the difference when they get so far outside the mainstream and so detached from reality.
Beth says:
Congrats, infragreen, you’re now welcome to read here, but your comments won’t be approved if you can’t even act like an adult to your own ideological allies. Go back to your own playground, you ridiculous troll.
Sorry Aaron, I missed that one earlier.
Beth says:
Aaron,
That’s very true, and I attribute it almost exclusively to the explosion of the internet (as illustrated here). Not that I’m anti-internet; I’m just anti-idiotarian.
infragreen says:
I don’t NEED to be civil, especially on a blog with THIS title.
Not being nice does not equal insanity.
[The rest of the comment has been deleted, because it was prefaced with the stupidity above. Say goodbye, troll. --The Management™]
OldGuy says:
Wow, I go work and the Ronulons keep on posting.
Do any of you you guys got jobs?
To Slightly Askew, no I don’t think the number of bills passed mean a tinkers damn, quality legislation is what matters. You guys are so obsessed with what everyone else does that you don’t bother to pause for just one second and reflect on what Ron Paul has failed to accomplish.
In 20 years he has not been able to manipulate one iota of of his political currency to advance any…and I mean any…legislation to move towards a more “constitutional” governance of the people.
Ron Paul is the one who wants to be president, he’s the one who claims to have all the answers for the problems that plague us.
Everybody likes to point out his doctors credentials, well would you let a doctor perform heart surgery on you or a loved one who has never done the procedure before?
Wouldn’t you like to see a track record that indicates that the guy has a better than average success rate?
Ron Paul has no verifiable track record indicating that he could even use a bully pulpit to advance his ideals let alone any kind of record showing his success as a legislator.
And the majority of people know this.
You know what I think is going on with the Ron Paul campaign?
Debating Ron Paul
And that’s my opinion also.
David says:
Beth. Perhaps I wasn’t clear. When I wrote, “it seems very like the forces I’ve seen arrayed against Paul” it meant SOME of them, not ALL of them. You said nothing to refute what I said, in fact it can’t be refuted if it is taken as I intended, since it was only a suggestion or suspicion, if you will, that some of the posts, not here, but anywhere, may be bogus. I don’t see how that can be ruled out. I do not suggest for a moment that you personally are a party to such a thing, but it is easy to be taken in when something confirms what one already believes. I don’t dispute that some of Paul’s supporters, no doubt genuine, are ignorant, obnoxious, hateful and not interested in furthering the debate, but that is exactly what I see hovering around every candidate to some degree. I am only suggesting that posts that are so obviously embarrassing to Paul might be viewed with suspicion, and in any case discounted as not reflecting the candidate. It’s just too easy to set up. I think that he has many, many more supporters that are not so repellent, and I’m standing with them, and Dr. Paul. How about looking to the best people he inspires, instead of the worst?
DC says:
LOL as a real republican, seeing you neocons who hijacked our party squirm in fear of Ron Paul is what motivates me to continue to persuade my friends to vote for him.
…and its working.
OldGuy says:
Then you must have a few very stupid friends if you can convince people to vote for someone who hasn’t distinguished himself in congress in 20 years.
Hillary Clinton is getting spanked for her inexperience from her own party, don’t you think that most sane people would bother to ask the same question of RuPaul?
The man is asking the American people for a job, and his resume is sparse.
That’s his fault for skating along for 2 decades, America deserves better.
Dr. Pacelli says:
Regardless of the accusations that Mr. Jones is pushing “batshit crazy conspiracy theories”, the fact remains that he is a syndicated radio and television personality, thus is a bonafide member of the press. His message is certainly extreme, but after actually listening to his show for the first time today, it is clear he is against facism and discrimination. The beautiful thing about our country is that there is room for everyone, even if I disagree.
In terms of Mr. Paul and the controversy surrounding him, let us not forget that he is a veteran of the United States Air Force. Thus in my book he deserves at least as much respect as any other veteran.
Beth says:
Anyone who has kind, respectful words for Alex Jones clearly doesn’t have his head screwed on right, and is worthy of nothing but scorn and derision from me.
And about Ron Paul being an Air Force veteran: SO AM I. As a veteran, I reserve the right to acknowledge that yes, there are people who have served in uniform who aren’t worthy of my respect. A few examples: Timothy McVeigh, John Muhammad (the Beltway Sniper), Lee Harvey Oswald. Do you think they deserve “at least as much respect as any other veteran?”
Spare me the silly talk about RP being a veteran making him above reproach. I certainly can take my licks without hiding behind my retiree ID card, so waving RP’s few years of service (40 years ago) at me just makes me laugh.
And tell me, since RP was in the ANG, do you afford President Bush the same respect, as he also served in the ANG? Not to mention the fact that he’s the Commander in Chief?
Didn’t think so.
Run along, Mr. Strawman.
(And by the way, it’s spelled “fascism,” and using the word when you clearly don’t understand it just makes you look like a ridiculous moron.)
Beth says:
Correction: As a real dumbass.
But please, do continue being your off-putting foolish self, and be sure to flush your money down the Ron Paul toilet as well! It suits you so well!
Beth says:
Correction, Old Guy: He’s distinguished himself by consistently voting in line with the white supremacists, conspiracy theorists, anti-Semites, and troofers.
What a record!
;-)
OldGuy says:
The kooks don’t point you to his record in it’s totality though, they only want people looking at the sanitized version that misleads them into thinking what a great and noble American he is.
People are just now beginning to find out, not just because he’s so “popular” but because his lunatic supporters are pissing everyone off.
Well the lunatic fringe wants everyone to look at RuPauls record….they just shouldn’t be surprised with what comes up.
And as aside Dr. Pacelli, I’m a veteran also and that status don’t give me any special shield of infallibility, no more than it gives Ron Paul. So I’m also not impressed that he “served” cause guess what?
A few million guys and gals have also.
So you can stuff that little deflection where the sun don’t shine.