Ron and the Paulbots celebrate a terrorist by raising $3.5 mil Update: Make that $3.8 $4.2 mil
posted at 8:34 am on November 6, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
Remember, remember the 5th of November. That’s the day Ron Paul vaulted into serious political money.
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, aided by an extraordinary outpouring of Internet support Monday, hauled in more than $3.5 million in 20 hours.
Paul, the Texas congressman with a Libertarian tilt and an out-of-Iraq pitch, entered heady fundraising territory with a surge of Web-based giving tied to the commemoration of Guy Fawkes Day.
Fawkes was a British mercenary who failed in his attempt to kill King James I on Nov. 5, 1605. He also was the model for the protagonist in the movie “V for Vendetta.” Paul backers motivated donors on the Internet with mashed-up clips of the film on the online video site YouTube as well as the Guy Fawkes Day refrain: “Remember, remember the 5th of November.”
It’s kind of odd and kind of fitting that the Paulians chose Guy Fawkes Day. Fawkes was a terrorist who tried blowing up the king and Parliament to overthrow the government. The Paulians seem to think of themselves as insurgents against the more establishment candidates, but the fact is if Paul’s foreign and security policies were to be implemented, a whole lot of stuff is likely to get blown up. Even after 9-11, Paul thinks it’s outlandish that anyone could attack the US and if he were president he wouldn’t do anything about Iran’s nuclear program or the real terrorist threat from al Qaeda. Well, other than abolish pretty much every security measure that’s been set up and abandon the Middle East to the biggest thug on the block. Which is why things would tend to blow up if Paul were president.
As it turns out, Paul’s devoted were the only ones celebrating the Gunpowder plot’s 402nd anniversary. In Fawkes’ hometown of York, health and safety regulations have stifled pretty much everything that might be any fun.
No wet floors. No obstructions in the passageways. Many well-lighted emergency exits. But even with her respect for such policies — “You don’t want anyone to hurt themselves,” she said — Ms. Stapylton said it was a bit much that, apparently because of health and safety rules, York would not be sponsoring a traditional fireworks celebration for Guy Fawkes Night on Monday.
“Personally, I think it’s a bit silly,” she said.
York, along with many other municipalities, has often been the scene of huge events — fireworks, bonfires, the burning of creepy effigies of Fawkes — to commemorate the failure of Fawkes’s plan to blow up Parliament and the king in 1605, a shocking moment in British history. But in the face of increasingly onerous regulations, none are taking place in the city this year.
This paragraph pretty much sums up what’s become of England.
Among other things, the Slough authorities have argued that a bonfire would violate environmental laws, upset residents from foreign countries with no tradition of Guy Fawkes Day and kill animals that settle into the wood before it is set alight and are unable to escape.
“…upset residents from foreign countries with no tradition of Guy Fawkes Day…” Now who might that be?
Update: Huh?
Among those for whom a sustained Iraq occupation is not a make-or-break issue, Paul’s big day is going to win him a second look. But he has to lay off the gold standard schtick (at least for a while) and start speaking to conservatives again about the many issues he has in common with them. If he does, he might actually be able to make something of all this.
The gold standard stuff is not a “schtick.” Neither are the batty foreign policy or the associations with Alex Jones et al. That’s who Ron Paul is. It’s like that Denny Green interview — Paul is exactly who we think he is. Which means he’s a Bircheresque crank who happens to be running as a Republican, and who is allowing himself to be an empty vessel for whatever crankery isn’t otherwise represented by any of the other candidates. The Corner may be in need of a Buckleyesque intervention.
Update: Even with Paul’s Fawkes haul, he’s still way behind the top tier candidates in terms of funding. Open Secrets has him behind Thompson, Giuliani and Romney in ascending order. It took about five seconds of research to check up on where Ron really stands wrt the top tier candidates in fundraising.
Thanks to Slu for the Open Secrets linky.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Touche jdk,
I’m quite sure my inadequate analogy breaks down at the most elementary of levels. I just love football and wanted to throw that in somehow. However, managing to throw in a bomb every now and then, the US does not.
I’d just like to see a policy that shows the world, look, if you wake this sleeping giant, we’re not falling back to sleep until you’re decimated. Calling the marines off Falujah because there might still be some innocent civilians in the midst of the 10,000 jihadists isn’t my idea of instilling FEAR. Montana and Rice instilled fear into the eyes of the defense, because they would go deep when necessary. We just keep dinking and dunking.
sleestak on November 6, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Actually, I do have an answer; education, and it is working. It has taken us 50 years to get to this point, and it will take another 50 years to dig our way out of it.
And I’m not talking about government funded public education.
So, again, I ask, what is your next step? Vote for Ron Paul?
How well is that working out for you?
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 2:42 PM
One of OBL’s latest tapes gave us two options:
Which do you prefer? Regardless of what happened in the past, those are the two options he’s affording us: Keep dying, or “do away with the American democratic system of government”. I don’t see, “Or, alternatively, you could worry about domestic issues and remove your bases.”.
amerpundit on November 6, 2007 at 2:42 PM
offroadaz,
I have backed up my claims with links. As have others.
We’ve made great sport of eviscerated your “The U.S. supported the Taliban! The U.S. supported Bin Laden!” falsehoods.
Yet you still cling to your delusions. Your either the worst kind of fool or your crazy.
Mike Honcho on November 6, 2007 at 2:45 PM
I would love to see you illustrate the appropriate time we should have got involved during WWII sleestak. After invasion of Poland? Finland? Norway? Belgium? The Netherlands? Luxembourg? France? North Africa? China? French Indonesia? Greece? Yugoslavia?
Where (and how) do we say “They invaded Poland? Meh, who cares. Call me when they start killing in France.”?
mojowire on November 6, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Bryan, 4 months ago I completely agreed with you. I was 100% behind everything you believe in. Then I stopped and seriously questioned what we are doing. I tried to think of alternative solutions and scenarios. We are not at war with 1 state or person. We are fighting against an ideology. We can not fight this the same way we have fought other wars. There is no country to invade, no head of the snake to chop off. We are fighting against a different view point.
The only way we can remain safe is to remove the reason they have to hate us. We need to examine the reasons they hate us and re-evaluate our actions.
I’m not proposing an isolationist United States. I think it is vital for us to continue humanitarian projects. We need to continue helping people, providing food, medical aid and education. Sadly a lot of people view the US as a war mongering imperialist nation that overthrows governments for their own interest. This fuels radical islam and terrorist groups. We need to change our actions. Killing more of them and invading other countries does not change their opinions of us.
Closing down foreign military bases, stopping our policy of nation building, stopping covert operations to interfere with other governments will do this. Creating a government controlled group that’s sole purpose is to provide food, education, medical care and infrastructure aid to impoverished countries will do this. We need to examine our actions as a nation and take steps to rebuild our reputation.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Uhm if you take a look around, you might find out that we do that already. As a matter of fact, we are the most generous nation in the world – http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16638810/
RINO_Hunter on November 6, 2007 at 3:14 PM
Ah. . dude! The reason they hate us is their religion;
they are not Christians! Their prophet has told them to kill the non believer.
You did know that, right? You just forgot?
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 3:15 PM
What part of:
Did you miss?
amerpundit on November 6, 2007 at 3:16 PM
mojo,
I’m not implying that some mythical Maginot line of alliedom exists, and any enemy that crosses it is now subject to our fury whereas they were not before. Our entrance to WWII was also not so crystal clear as, “well, now they’ve attacked us.” Germany was attacking our shipping interests looong before we ever took any hardline military action. We showed remarkable restraint in not jumping in, but rather, supplying our allies as best we could. I don’t find a lot of fault in the “greatest generation’s” handling of the war.
What are you saying would have been the “appropriate time?”
sleestak on November 6, 2007 at 3:18 PM
So, every muslim in the US wants to kill us then?
We are not at war with a religion. We are at war with a radical ideology
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 3:18 PM
Nope, Im aware of that. However most people are not. The majority of citizens in other countries do not know this. And Im not only talking about donating money. We need people there, we need to interact with others. We need to spend time living with them, sharing our core values that make us American.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 3:20 PM
sure there are, the ones that are terror sponsor states and fund, support and harbor and in many cases such as iran, create these terrorist orgs.
countries that harbored the 1993 WTC bomber yasin, who was on their govt. payroll…..that would be Saddam’s Iraq. Or Afghanistan that harbored and supported as govt. policy, Al-Qaeda.
jp on November 6, 2007 at 3:20 PM
No, just the orthodox Islamist, not the secular muslims.
see Jihadwatch.org
jp on November 6, 2007 at 3:22 PM
US Agency for International Development
Ah… but ….well you might think it is a front agency for some other government agency, right?
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 3:23 PM
I don’t recall the sentiment that “every Muslim” wants to kill us. I was under the impression that rockhauler said that the reason the extremists want to kill us isn’t because we have bases or don’t give enough, it’s because we’re not Muslim…The extremists are driven by hate for us because of our non-belief, IOW.
amerpundit on November 6, 2007 at 3:24 PM
…
amerpundit on November 6, 2007 at 3:26 PM
I agree with your sentiment about not calling off the dogs of war. Respect however goes much farther then fear. Until the day that people truly understand respect they’ll be stuck with fear and if they want to take a swing they do so at their own peril.
Lose – lose situation no matter when you decide to act. When you decide to act then act decisively with purpose. Don’t launch a cruise missile into an empty tent then pat yourself on the back for being tough.
jdkchem on November 6, 2007 at 3:26 PM
Exactly. Which is why I say we are not at war with one person, a country or have a tangible way to invade and win. We are fighting against a thought process. Invading a country and killing thousands of people does nothing to change the way they think. If anything, it creates more of a reason for those sitting on the fence to hate us. It just reinforces the negative ideas that the radicals have.
As for jihadwatch it is a great site. I have Robert Spencers book at home as well.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 3:27 PM
I see you are trying to say I am hypocritcal. That is not the case. Providing humanitarian aid does not involve nation building. If we show other nations that we do care about them, and we help them with basic issues such as infrastructure, educatoin and medical aid, then the people of those countries will take care of themselves. We can focus on our own internal issues and still show kindness and decency to others.
We should never try to force our ideas or views on any country. We should never attempt to help any nation that does not directly request it.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 3:31 PM
Check this out; The Nizkor project and see if your rebuttal resembles the False Dilemma fallacy.
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 3:34 PM
Giving other nations food, medicine, education, and infrastructure aid does, however:
first, when people are starving here, our education system sucks, and a major bridge just recently collapsed. By the
standard, we should be fixing our own internal problems (feeding the hungry, fixing our education, strengthening our infrastructure) before sending envoys around the world to hand out food, medicine, education, and infrastructural aid.
amerpundit on November 6, 2007 at 3:37 PM
I have been to Thailand several times, I passed out food, gave clothes to people living in slums, provided basic first aid, spent time talking with them and playing with the kids. Does that mean I was nation building?
We can do both things. We could have a volunteer group that is funded by our government that does this.
Paul has great plans for fixing our social problems. I think we should implement them. Helping other nations and showing that our country is a giving nation will also help with our internal problems. It will give Americans something to focus on other then themselves and will help us become amore future oriented nation.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Strangely enough, a key fact about Guy Fawkes Day is being left out of this discussion. Guy Fawkes was a terrorist act by a Catholic supremist, by devoted Catholics. Thus, Guy Fawkes is a day to celebrate the defeat of religious supremacism. But the Paulnut’s narrative reads this holiday backwards. They are celebrating terrorism by religious supremacists. It’s great symbol for the Paul campaign.
Since 1605, Catholicism has given up being quite so supreme. On the other hand, one other religion has not given up supremacism. I hope that there is day like Guy Fawkes Day we can celebrate in the future where we can joyfully chant “Death to Islam.”
thuja on November 6, 2007 at 3:45 PM
we also need to be at war with them abroad, because it forces all their energies, money and supplies to battle us outside the US.
jp on November 6, 2007 at 3:48 PM
So a few crazies bomb us, and we kill 100 million people (men , women, and children) and destroy thousands of years of history, that makes sense. All because we are going to “show them” not to mess with us.
You pretty much defined stupid and lunatic in one post.
See? Ron Paul supporters are nutty fruit cakes.
right2bright on November 6, 2007 at 3:52 PM
You answered my question by asking it of me, but what the hell, I’ll answer.
You talk about the attacks on our shipping. We were supplying our allies, in my view, out of guilt for declaring neutrality. If it were the only instance of aggression, I would agree with retaliation on Naval forces and sanctions.
BUT, to answer your question (my question) I would say the invasion of Poland. The Brits had it right threating declaration of war if they did, and hell, even the Canadians showed more spine sooner than we did.
So, um, when would YOU think it appropriate?
mojowire on November 6, 2007 at 3:59 PM
No, I didn’t say it was nation building. I said:
Giving other nations food, medicine, education, and infrastructure aid does, however:
solve everyone elses
first, when people are starving here, our education system sucks, and a major bridge just recently collapsed.
Like USAID?
amerpundit on November 6, 2007 at 3:59 PM
His plans:
1. Declare defeat by withdrawing from Iraq.
2. ???
3. Profit.
Hollowpoint on November 6, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Man you could not have proven what I said any better had you actually tired. You’re not trying to understand anything, you are attempting to employee a passive aggressive pretend to be rational intellectually dishonest truther debate strategy. Guess what I’m not falling for it, I see it very clearly for what it is.
You are sitting in front of a computer, the single greatest research tool ever invented. You could have in the space of less than a half an hour enlightened yourself to the real facts surrounding all this issues you have brought up. Yet not only did you not do this, you obvious don’t even know the difference between valid and invalid reference material.
Let me clue you in on something, Alex Jones, truther or conspiracy website like prisonplanet are not valid reference material sites. Nor for that matter are Noam Chomsky or Norman Finkelstein.
And no, I am not going to bother teaching what you should already know, namely how to distinguish between a valid and invalid reference material source. If you don’t already know, then you never will.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 4:03 PM
Since you have first hand experience in Thailand, perhaps you were in the Peace Corps, another
?
And perhaps you could help those of us who have never been there, to understand news accounts like this one, from Asia Times circa 2003, among so many others.
And Ron Paul’s policy would help in what way?
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 4:09 PM
Great program. I have never heard of it before. It would be great that when you metion the US in another country, USAID would be the first thing people thought of.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Poland is a nice sentiment but who do you go after adolph or uncle joe?
jdkchem on November 6, 2007 at 4:11 PM
You were facilitating a pseudo welfare state. I would call the Peace Corps nation builders, is that wrong?
Give a man a fish… Ya know?
mojowire on November 6, 2007 at 4:12 PM
Nope, wasnt there with peace corps. A few friends from chuch decided to go there and help out and witness to people. No I am not mormon.
We were there during the middle of the SARS disease. It was over hyped in the media, we never felt threatened by the disease or worried.
As far as situation in the south it is sad. Any loss of life is regrettable. Thailand has some issues to work on to bring that under control.
I was there in 2003 and 2006. In 03 I had a chance to sit down with a few muslims from Pakistan. We talked about common intrests, I was suprised they had alot of American TV shows there. They were big fans of the Simpsons.
Eventually our conversation turned to sept 11th. We kept the conversation cordial, they did not hate me and I did not feel threatened. However they did not express any remorse for the loss of life. They said that the Trade Center and Pentagon were fair targets because they were government buildings and had federal employees working there.
I asked them why they had such a bad opinion of America. They said they disliked our involvement in other countries and did not like our support for Israel. I know some of you might insisit that I am lying or right off what I said as another crazy argument but it is the honest truth.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:17 PM
How can you have a sanctity of life act and then be for abortions?
tomas on November 6, 2007 at 4:20 PM
Yep, again you are resorting to name calling. I am not a truther, I voted for Bush on both occasions. I do not believe in 9-11 conspiracy theories. I do however believe that our actions overseas are causing more problems then they solve. Paul has ideas that are 100% different then any major candidate. This is one of the reasons I like him. He has a different vision for this country. In the beginning I wrote him off as a crazy barney fife. But I started to think about what he was saying and I do agree with him. Rather then hating everything the man stands for why not sit down and look at his ideas. Every idea is a valid one, wether you agree with it or not.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:22 PM
Had someone policed Germany in 1936, 20 million Russians would have still been alive in 1945.
csdeven on November 6, 2007 at 4:23 PM
Finally we have it.
Just what is it we have to change, about our support for Israel?
Do we have to abandon them completely, or just persuade them to give up some, more, all, land? Or stop giving them military aid, or financial aid?
And Ron Paul’s policy toward Israel is. . .?
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 4:26 PM
Nope its not wrong, its your opinion. I think of nation building as creating a new government either by direct force or by proxy. Teaching people basic skills and helping to create clean and working sanitation system is basic human decency. There is no reason we have people living in filth. There is no reason for people to not know about basic medical care, there is no reason people should not have a basic education. We should teach people about these things so they can teach others.
We should not goto a nation and be the permanent welfare group. We need to focus on teaching them how to take care of themselves.
If the world saw us as a generous, giving, caring nation then we would remove the major fuel for radical terrorist groups that hate us.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Has the British Strategy in Southern Iraq Failed?
Worth a read as it provides a preview of Paulist non-intervention “diplomacy”. Eventually you cannot leave your own house.
jdkchem on November 6, 2007 at 4:28 PM
here is a preview of what Ron Paul thinks about Israel, and once you start to understand what produces this type of sheer idiocy you begin to understand why the Neo-Nazi’s support him so much.
this on the anti-war website after the Israel/hezzbollah war last year:
you have to be a complete Idiot and fooll to hold that view and not be anti-semitic.
jp on November 6, 2007 at 4:43 PM
I am going to run home, and crochet that on a pillow, and sleep oh so gently now.
mojowire on November 6, 2007 at 4:45 PM
Utter bull$hit……..This is a perfect example of why you Paultards are ridiculed so often by so many. Intellectually dishonest disingenuous obfuscating arrogant little miscreants. How you retards manage to convince yourselves that you are so much smarter than all the rest of society confounds and amazes me.
No lets get something straight. No rational intelligent educated individual lacking serious psychosis or dementia could possible could possibly side with Ron Paul. Or for that matter consider him a genuinely viable candidate.
You really have to be suffering from a serious mental disorder to have chosen him. Simply stated your claims of once having been a normal rational intelligent person require a willing suspension of disbelief, one that I am not going to grant you.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 4:46 PM
glad I could help
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:47 PM
and hold hands and sing kumbaya….
this stuff is far left looney tune idiocy, which is what Paul is on foreign policy at best, an anti-semite with alterior motives at worst.
jp on November 6, 2007 at 4:47 PM
Wow. You really can’t post with out insults can you?
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:48 PM
and I have news for you, we are a giving, caring nation. Look at how much aide we already give to the world.
you see in the real world, it doesn’t matter that much. Because our enemies, which we’ll always have, will lie and promote propaganda against the US like they already are. Much of which you and fools like ron paul buy into.
jp on November 6, 2007 at 4:49 PM
What is wrong with the Gold Standard? Austrian Economics shows that it is the better economic system than the unbacked economic system.
After all, Hayek and Von Mises both won Nobel Prizes for their economic theories and both were based upon the gold standard.
Whatever Happened to Penny Candy?
What Has the Government done with Our Money? By Rothbard
Tim Burton on November 6, 2007 at 4:49 PM
How do you propose we win then? Do you advocate killing all radical islamists, locking them in camps? What should our strategy be?
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:50 PM
My insults are nothing compared to the manner you have been insulting the intelligence of everyone here with your intellectually dishonest and disingenuous trolling. Get a clue, you’re not fooling anyone but yourself.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 4:54 PM
If they spew hate or pick up a weapon of any kind then yes I do.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 4:55 PM
So they arent entitled to freedom of speach? Nothing like mass murder to change a persons mind.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 4:58 PM
there isn’t enough Gold in the world to back our current currency float, which is over 7 Trillion dollars. They would have to get their hands on all the currency in float(impossible), re-issue it and turn the whole worlds economic system upside down.
second, the type of ‘gold standard’ paul advocates is against fractional lending, which means you would no longer be able to get a loan to buy a house or car from a bank.
third, at some point you have to get realistic and humble on this. The amount of prosperity we see today, most of which was created after we ditched the Gold standard, means we are doing something right, and the Fed has avoided recessions turning into depressions, which was common in the 1800’s.
jp on November 6, 2007 at 5:01 PM
Not all that bright are you. Radical Islamic hate speech always results in someone getting killed and therefore does not deserve protection under freedom of speech. Again this dazzling display of intellect is so underwhelming.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:20 PM
This, however, is an article of faith. How do you actually know our inaction overseas would not “cause” even greater problems? On what evidence do you (or could you possibly, even) base your claim?
Blacklake on November 6, 2007 at 5:20 PM
I dont. However, I think that our current policies do not work.
If I had a cut on my leg and I poured salt on it because thats what Ive always done even though it hurt, why would I change? Maybe because my current strategy caused me more pain then good. I think it is the same way with our foreign policy.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:28 PM
The gold standard restricts your economy to the amount of gold in the economy. No one can create wealth by invention, innovation, or labor. (Understand the difference between creating wealth, and accumulating wealth.)
You can not start a new industry unless you dismantle and defund an old industry. You can not grow your economy until you acquire more gold. Your production of something, i.e. food, is restricted by the amount of gold available to buy it. People, however, reproduce automagically.
Your trade becomes nothing more than barter; exchange something for gold, then exchange gold for something. You can not borrow money unless someone has idle money [gold] available. Having idle gold, buried in your back yard, doesn’t help the economy; its idle wealth, removed from circulation.
Read Milton Friedman’s book “Money Mischief”. (HHmm..I need to re-read that book myself.)
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 5:28 PM
He has none, nor does he have the intellectual capacity to even begin to address that question. All he has is the ability to parrot without understanding what other moonbats have said.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:29 PM
So an American citizen standing on a corner spreading hate speech should be imprisoned or killed?
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:29 PM
See, what did I tell you, couldn’t even begin to address the question, instead had to attempt to reduce a complex question to a simply analogy.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:31 PM
I guess the same goes for you? You continue insults instead of answering the question.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:33 PM
Got a link for that? I have two for you: blame and motivation.
The world isn’t ours to cede or protect. The President’s job is to protect America. When it comes to protecting America, none of the other major candidates has any credibility. Romney and Giuliani are draft dodgers, and Thompson never served. Ron Paul has the toughest stance on border protection. Ron Paul is the only one who would recall our troops from stations in Japan, South Korea, Columbia, Germany etc so that those troops could be available for America’s defense. Ron Paul is the only person who had a workable (and Constitutional, to boot) plan to capture the people responsible for the 9/11 attacks without overextending our troops and putting them in harm’s way.
Look at those Q3 numbers more closely — specifically at debt. As of end of Q3, Romney was more than 8 million dollars in the hole. Fred Thompson was only a million ahead of Paul. Rudy was trouncing them all with $16.5 million of net cash on hand. With Ron Paul’s $4 million dollar day, he well may be ahead of Thompson, making his balance sheet second only to Giuliani’s. Not bad for someone whose name is mentioned on TV only once for every 20 mentions of John McCain.
Mark Jaquith on November 6, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Well duh……..yea……..Hate speech is a federal crime, and hate speech that results in another’s death is punishable as first degree murder……. What the hell could you possible be thinking? Freedom of speech is not and never has been freedom from responsibility.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:38 PM
If you don’t have evidence, you don’t think it, you merely believe it. To believe in the truth of a proposition without supporting evidence is not to think at all; rather, it is explicitly irrational.
The main reason that many conservatives take issue with Ron Paul and his supporters is that their geopolitical views are similarly irrational.
Blacklake on November 6, 2007 at 5:41 PM
You don’t want answers, why would I give you something you obviously do not want? You are foolishly playing a game here mistakenly believing that you are so smart nobody will know what you are doing…Wrong answer……..Nobody here is seriously attempting to educate you, they are all mocking you, and you just aren’t bright enough to figure it out.
Thats the difference between Ron Paultards and everybody else, no other rational intelligent person could possible mistake the condescending air of mockery being inflicted on you here.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:43 PM
I pasted examples above of why I dont think our current foreign policy works. Most people on here disagree with me, that is fine. Like I have said earlier I will vote my conscious in the primary but vote for whatever republican is there in the general election.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Who are you voting for? Who did you vote for in the last 2 elections?
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:46 PM
Just some quick data regarding oil imports and the Middle East…
I hope most of you know that of the Top 5 countries we import oil from only ONE is in the Middle East. That’s right, folks. And which country do we import more oil from than any other? CANADA
Below is the Top 5 Countries the U.S. imports oil from as of August 2007…
1. Canada
2. Saudia Arabia
3. Mexico
4. Nigeria
5. Venezuela
Crude Oil Imports to U.S.
eanax on November 6, 2007 at 5:47 PM
I’m voting for the republican nominee, who ever that turns out to be unless its Ron Paul, then I’m voting for anyone but Ron Paul. Lets see, I voted for Reagan twice, I voted for Bush SR. once and I voted for Clinton twice and then I voted for Bush two more times. I was actually going to vote for Gore, but then he went all crazy at the last minute and thank god I changed my mind before helping to put that imbecile into the WH.
Oh and yes I am still a proud supported of Bush Jr. So stick that up your piehole and rotate it.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:52 PM
Some of the things I like about Paul
American Independence
We must withdraw from any organizations and trade eals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America. Namely NAFTA, UN, WTO and others
Border Security
Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform.
Debt and Taxes
We cannot continue to allow private banks, wasteful agencies, lobbyists, corporations on welfare, and governments collecting foreign aid to dictate the size of our ballooning budget. We need a new method to prioritize our spending. It’s called the Constitution of the United States.
Home Schooling
I am committed to guaranteeing parity for home school diplomas and advancing equal scholarship consideration for students entering college from a home school environment.
We must have permanency in the Department of Defense Home School Tier 1 Pilot Program, providing recruitment status parity for home school graduates. I will use my authority to prevent the Department of Education from regulating home school activities.
I will veto any legislation that creates national standards or national testing for home school parents or students. I also believe that, as long as No Child Left Behind remains law, it must include the protections for home schoolers included in sec. 9506 (enshrining home schoolers’ rights) and 9527 (guaranteeing no national curriculum).
Pro Life
The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.
Personal Liberty and Privacy
The biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding citizens’ personal matters.
We must stop the move toward a national ID card system. All states are preparing to issue new driver’s licenses embedded with “standard identifier” data — a national ID. A national ID with new tracking technologies means we’re heading into an Orwellian world of no privacy. I voted against the Real ID Act in March of 2005.
Right to bear arms
I share our Founders’ belief that in a free society each citizen must have the right to keep and bear arms. They ratified the Second Amendment knowing that this right is the guardian of every other right, and they all would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents law-abiding Americans from exercising this right.
Foreign Policy
The generosity of the American people has been felt around the globe. Many have thanked God for it, in many languages. Let us have a strong America, conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.
Under no circumstances should the U.S. go to war as the result of a resolution that comes from an unelected, foreign body, such as the United Nations.
Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:57 PM
Youre a real nice guy. I dont think youve done one post without an insult in it. I voted for Bush too! :)
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 5:58 PM
Sigh……….A mind is a terrible thing to waste. How long has Canada been number one? How long has Iraq been number 7? How long has it been since we imported oil from Iran? those numbers reflect todays geopolitical realities, not the realities that led us to where we are today. Look to the past to understand the present.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 5:59 PM
I was stationed in Japan for four years. Paul’s notion that recalling troops from overseas “so they’ll be available for America’s defense” is just more proof that he’s an idiot. The troops in Japan served to keep the Soviets and Chinese out and Communism and Shintoism down long enough for democracy to take root, which it has. Now they’re there to protect other interests in the neighborhood and to keep everyone over there from devolving into chaos. We’ve had similar reasons for staying on in Germany and South Korea. Our troops in those places are forces for stability.
Not that I expect any of that to sink in…
So, Mark, do you support Paul’s relationship with Alex Jones?
Bryan on November 6, 2007 at 5:59 PM
Why is it the job of the United States to provide stability to the rest of the world? Can’t they work out problems on their own? Shouldn’t the UN, EU or other groups step in and do the job of world police rather then one nation?
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 6:04 PM
If you consult the history books, you’ll find their track record is actually quite poor.
Blacklake on November 6, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Actually I am a nice guy, not very tactful but quite honest in my opinions and how I express them. What you don’t seem to realize or be able to comprehend is just how intellectually insulting your posts have been.
This is a political blog, nobody here is ignorant regarding Ron Paul, or his stances on the issues. Furthermore very few people here are ignorant regarding the historical events that led America to where it is today.
The majority of us here are very well aware of the incidents that have been discussed and we see the disturbing amount of misinformation or down right falsehoods in the statements you have thus far made.
He11 you would probably be amazed at the number of people posting here who were directly or very closely indirectly involved in those events. I dare say that were some of those people to reply to your comments their honest and unmoderated responses would be far less kind than anything I have said.
Put simply you just don’t know what you are talking about and you are barking moonbat raving platitudes in defense of ideas you really neither understand nor have any real knowledge about.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 6:09 PM
I think you take my post in the wrong way. I was merely pointing out facts about where we import oil from.
The Leftists and Isolationists say Iraq is a war for oil. This claim is a canard.
eanax on November 6, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Almost did it. But guess you couldn’t do an entire post without an insult. Too bad.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Because we have the ability to do so. We do it for world stability and in friendship with the nations we help protect.
eanax on November 6, 2007 at 6:14 PM
My apologies, You are of course right. We could have spent 1/10 of what we have on this war and bought Iraq’s full production output for decades. Would have been much cheaper and much easier.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 6:15 PM
I’m sorry that obvious facts are so insulting to you.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 6:16 PM
Please show falsehoods. I have drawn conclusions based on information available. The US funded the ISI and afghans. The ISI funded bin laden and radical islam. So, the conclusion I have drawn is that some US money went to bin laden.
If you look around on the internet you can find posts from me stating that, I am not sure if I agree 100% with Paul and his foreign policy. I do agree with his domestic views and I am leaning towards agreement on his foreign policy. I think the US is not on the right track in spreading democracy. We need to do something different. Paul is the only candidate advocating a different approach.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Wow, dorian, you are so smart and have such a great command of the English language. Please, please teach us wise one, so that we retards may learn your wise ways. You have convinced me “that you are so much smarter than all the rest of society.” I now know that us retards should vote for whomever the Republican candidate is, regardless of that candidates qualifications or views on issues. Please, tell us more, oh great one. What else should we do?
I bet you have tons of friends with your condescending and arrogant personality don’t you? It must be tough being so much smarter than everyone else (is that what you took away from Bob’s College of Knowledge?). You epitomize what is wrong with this forum. You are no different than the disgusting liberals at the DKos and HuffPo. Just put the big hammer of government in your hands, and you’d show everyone how to wield it, right?
King of the Britons on November 6, 2007 at 6:42 PM
Duho! Except ME!. Before this Ron Paul bruhaha blew up I’d never heard of the guy, nor did I know anything about him.
I learn something new with every comment. Please keep’m posting stuff, I’ll keep learning.
rockhauler on November 6, 2007 at 6:42 PM
No, try clicking on my nic. I’m a retired musician a federalist and so conservative I’m more libertarian than republican. I’m also 46 and a former spook, whose field of expertise was……….The Middle East, specifically Iran, Iraq Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
doriangrey on November 6, 2007 at 6:50 PM
Ohhhhhh . .. a genius and a spook. Wow. I am even more impressed with your resume. So smart, and so dangerous. I bet you used to drive a taxi on Victory Drive, didn’t you? I met many a decorated “spook” at the Traffic Light. Did you used to entertain your team with the harmonica around the trash fire? Your image and persona is becoming more clear by the post.
King of the Britons on November 6, 2007 at 6:57 PM
I was at class so I just now noticed that you didn’t quite answer the question. Does Paul’s relationship with Jones bother you? I realize that you may not want to give a yes or no answer, and I generally agree that yes/no answers aren’t sufficient for most questions.
But there are some questions that don’t require any further explanation beyond a yes or a no, and this is one of them. So, again, does Paul’s cozy relationship with a guy who calls 9/11 an inside job and thinks a secret group is trying to kill 80% of the people on earth bother you?
BadgerHawk on November 6, 2007 at 6:58 PM
OMFG! I didn’t actually click on the name until after the last post. ROTGLMFAO! Nice hair, nice F%$KING HAIR MAN!!!! You have completed the persona and I would love to hear more!
King of the Britons on November 6, 2007 at 7:01 PM
it seems his music is popular on their too
From a “fan”
This is, bar none, the worst tripe I’ve heard from someone posing as an artist. At first I thought it was satire; then I realized this gooper was serious. Simplistic lyrics, juvenile arrangements and mediocre instrumentation (is that a synthetic drum in the background?) are the hallmarks of this audio holocaust. If forced to listen to this screeching, do yourself a favor: ask — no beg — for a pair of knitting needles and ram them repeatedly in and out of your ears. F- ”
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 7:05 PM
Yes, the relationship, if there is a relationship, bothers me. Does Rudy’s pro-gun control stance bother you? Does Mitt’s univeral healthcare as governor bother you? Does Fred Thompson’s pro-McCain-Feingold bother you? I don’t profess that Paul is Jesus, just that I agree with most of what he says about most things. I will say again – I don’t believe that 9-11 was an inside job and think that anyone who does believe that to be a nut. However, I do believe that our government does many things that are not above board (Pat Tillman’s Silver Star being one) and think that a healthy distrust of our government is important.
King of the Britons on November 6, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Kucinich? He advocates a Department of Peace and Nonviolence, that’s surely a different approach.
Just because something is “different” doesn’t mean it’s better. Frank J says we should nuke the moon. It’s a different idea but it’s entirely debatable whether it would in fact WORK, which is what matters. Looking at the current landscape I’ve seen good outcomes and bad outcomes as a result of our foreign policy, and I do believe our policy is flawed. However I find no reason to believe that a policy of non-intervention would achieve better outcomes, especially considering what the Jihadist’s demand and their furvor.
Currently non-interventionism seems off the table to me.
Keljeck on November 6, 2007 at 7:20 PM
Hmm something doesn’t make sense here. I did a quick yahoo search on our friend Stephen Walker / Dorian Grey. I dont see where he was involved with the CIA? Maybe I have the wrong guy?
Stephen Walker started playing guitar at 14 and got his B.F.A in music in 1986 from the United States International University in San Diego. In 1991 his band Dorian Grey formed its own record label (Loud Records) and released a four-song EP; it sold so well that Loud Records promptly went bankrupt. After Dorian Grey’s breakup, Walker has worked on his own material, much of which is available in MP3 format
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 7:24 PM
KING of the “Britons” is a TROLL!
Don’t feed the TROLLS!
Drewarmor on November 6, 2007 at 7:27 PM
You helped me make my point. While I don’t like some of the policy decisions of the other Republicans in the race, I understand that reasonable people can disagree about policy. What resonable people cannot disagree about is whether or not some vast government conspiracy was responsible for 9/11. One side of that argument is reasonable, one side is not. Paul’s laizze faire approach to Jones and the countless truthers that comprise his base should be all that a reasonable person needs to distance themselves from him, no matter what his other policy decisions are.
Switch Paul’s courting of the truthers for a courting of white supremacists. Is it still acceptable to support him? Most of his policy positions are still pretty cool. What if it were supporters of radical Islam fawning over Paul? Is it ok then? While Paul doesn’t actively court the support of those two groups, the fact that he has more support among them than any other candidate, from either party, should again be more than enough for one to distance themselves from him.
Paul does have some very solid conservative positions. Just about everyone here likes at least some of his policy positions. But there are certain aspects of Paul and his supporters that just don’t pass the smell test. I’m glad you’re not a truther and that you’re going to vote for whichever Republican candidate comes out on top. But I think you should take a serious look at those unsettling sides to Paul and ask youself if it’s really worth supporting him simply because of how great you think most of his other positions are.
BadgerHawk on November 6, 2007 at 7:31 PM
Of course you don’t see that. Spooks don’t advertise that they are spooks (see Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame/Richard Armitage). They are secret, mysterious, dangerous, and only talk about their experience when trying to establish credibility on a blog site. That music stuff is just a cover – all good spooks have to have a cover. Many choose book stores, antique dealers, or music. Stop digging, you may find yourself in trouble if you keep it up. Just know and understand – dorian is wise, smarter than you, and tells you to vote Republican, no matter what!
King of the Britons on November 6, 2007 at 7:32 PM
I can understand your argument. I am still undecided on Pauls foreign policy. I can see both sides of the issue. I think we are too involved overseas. I think our practice of nation building needs to stop. I can also understand the viewpoint that if we stop attacking radical islam overseas then they will grow stronger and move here. I am on the fence with this issue, but leaning more towards Pauls side then the other.
offroadaz on November 6, 2007 at 7:35 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »