Hot Air » Blog Archive » Paulnuts’ foolproof plan to win the election: Buying an ad on Roy Jones Jr.’s back

Paulnuts’ foolproof plan to win the election: Buying an ad on Roy Jones Jr.’s back

posted at 2:19 pm on January 15, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Big fight on Saturday night, coincidentally on the same day that two major primaries are taking place. What better time for a little product placement? He’s 15-20 points off the pace in Nevada but the thinking is that boxing fans will tune into HBO, be stirred by the pluck and savvy of paying thousands of dollars to have a greasepaint Paulnut logo slathered on Jones’s back, and then rush out after the fight to their polling places to cast a vote for the man half-drunk and sight unseen. The only problem: The fight starts at 9 p.m. ET/6 p.m. PT and will probably last an hour, by which time the SC polls will almost certainly be closed and the Nevada caucuses, judging from the time given on the SoS’s page, will have long since been over. rEVOLution!

TNR has new excerpts from the Ron Paul “Survival” Report out today, in case you’re interested. I recommend the one from April 1993 about whether AIDS was manufactured in a lab. Or just skip it entirely and read the condensed version at Something Awful. How many parasitic destroyers of American society can you find in the word-search game? I’ve found two so far.

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

Goldwater wanted to NUKE the North Vietnamese

Goldwater was probably just saber-rattling regarding nukes, but he was also calling Johnson out for taking an “incremental” approach to the war. The US ended up doing the heavy bombing that Goldwater talked about in 1964, we just stretched it out for another decade. Maybe Vietnam is an argument for “declaring war” rather than letting Presidents gradually wade into a conflict that the country hasn’t committed to.

Clearly, Goldwater was much much more in favor of military strength than Paul, but he was probably closer to Paul than to the other 2008 GOP contenders on the size and scope of the federal government.

dedalus on January 15, 2008 at 8:27 PM

Goldwater wanted to NUKE the North Vietnamese
Paul quotes Ghandi

I’m not a supporter of Paul, or of Ghandi for that matter. I just noticed, though, the juxtaposition of Gandhi being a successful revolutionary in India and the United States losing out to a revolutionary named Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam.

Maybe a few of the things Gandhi said are worth understanding, especially as we occupy a country where the Brits were less than successful.

dedalus on January 15, 2008 at 8:37 PM

Just another Malkin klan blog criticizing the “Paulnuts” and not Paul’s message.

Yaaawwwwwnnnn…

Fed Up on January 15, 2008 at 9:59 PM

The New Republic magazine has just posted on its home page a second attack on Ron Paul, tremulously titled More Scandalous Selections From Ron Paul’s Newsletters.

Of course, all this is hysterical, hypocritical Political Correctness, as Steve Sailer has demonstrated. We’re posting some more thoughts by John Derbyshire later tonight.

But a quick observation – look at this:

A May 1990 issue of the Ron Paul Political Report cites Jared Taylor, who six months later would go onto found the eugenicist and white supremacist periodical American Renaissance.

The May 1991 issue of the Ron Paul Political Report cites American Renaissance and offers readers subscription information for it.

(Links in original).

American Renaissance is, of course, not “white supremacist” but White Nationalist, i.e dedicated to the interests of American whites, a position at least as legitimate as TNR’s Zionism. I’ve never seen AmRen write about eugenics other than to discuss the genetic basis of intelligence, which is at least a respectable scientific hypothesis, if not a fact. These distictions are lost on TNR.

The first reference appears to be a passage to Taylor’s 1992 book Paved With Good Intentions noting that black-on-white killings in the Bronx received virtually no publicity compared to white-on-black killings in Bensonhurst and Howard Beach. (Footnotes in book).

The second reference is to a spectacularly pessimistic quotation about race relations from Abraham Lincoln in 1862, when he was urging the settlement of freed slaves in Central America. AmRen dug it up and merely gets what is now called a “hat-tip”.

The Paul letter adds: “Should we follow Lincoln here, any more than his pro-paper money. pro-income tax views? Of course not.”

Somehow, TNR failed to note this disavowal.

The common thread here is that truth is not a defense to TNR types. They don’t think, they emote. Jared Taylor is evil, even if what he is saying is entirely factual. And the TNR types want to emote – hence the repression of the Paul letter’s disavowal of Lincoln.

There are profound psychological forces at work here. And they are poisoning America’s national debate.

The petty bourgeois adds: so too is HotAir posioning the debate.

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/01/15/thinking-about-tnr-s-second-paulpurge-piece/

petit bourgeois on January 15, 2008 at 10:05 PM

You cyber-rapscallions have turned the once genteel pastime of web surfing into something truly ugly with your viscious name calling.

You don’t have anything else bookmarked?

Jim Treacher on January 15, 2008 at 10:13 PM

agree that this is a stupid idea, but every one of you who uses the term “Paulnuts” is a stone cold asshole.
Good point, Rontard.

If you’ll do it, I will too, cockface.

You really have no self-awareness whatsoever, do you?

Jim Treacher on January 15, 2008 at 10:16 PM

Paulnut is a descriptive term, not a puerile epithet.

When your candidate’s chief source of support consists of people who believe the Mossad and/or Shabak is responsible for the destruction of the WTC, white “nationalist” and white supremacist bigots, paranoid gold bugs, and Neolithic racists, then you’ve earned the moniker.

Gerard on January 15, 2008 at 11:09 PM

When your candidate’s chief source of support consists of people who believe the Mossad and/or Shabak is responsible for the destruction of the WTC, white “nationalist” and white supremacist bigots, paranoid gold bugs, and Neolithic racists, then you’ve earned the moniker.

Gerard on January 15, 2008 at 11:09 PM

And being a fiat money loving bloke gets you what moniker?

Answer: “Duped”

Fed Up on January 15, 2008 at 11:48 PM