Audio: The obligatory “Paulnut goes nuts” post
posted at 9:41 pm on January 23, 2008 by Allahpundit
Search far and wide across the political spectrum and you’ll find only one candidate’s supporters willing and able to work themselves up into a screaming fit over, um, Abraham Lincoln.
Weep for the host’s failure to ask him for his opinion on the confederacy.
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: 1 2 Next »
“No I’m not”
lol
CABE on January 23, 2008 at 8:12 PM
What a loser.
Ceroth on January 23, 2008 at 8:18 PM
“AHGHAHGHGAHGAHGHGAHGHAHAGGHGAHAGHGA
Except for Ron Paul.”
That was freaking great.
triple on January 23, 2008 at 8:18 PM
He seemed rather calm and rational for a Paulestinian. Compared to a human he was nuts, though….
Master Shake on January 23, 2008 at 8:22 PM
hahahaha, priceless.
jp on January 23, 2008 at 8:23 PM
interesting he mentioned Jefferson during the rant about the Constitution and “Declarations of War”, since Jefferson lobbied for War with the Barbary Pirates and their city state sponsors for 15 years, then as President took us to War without going to congress at all, which lasted 4 years and resumed down the road in the Second Barbary War.
jp on January 23, 2008 at 8:26 PM
That was obviously a ringer. But it was still a pretty damn funny bit.
Lee on January 23, 2008 at 8:26 PM
What the hell is a “protectionalist”?
Mark1971 on January 23, 2008 at 8:32 PM
Wooooooo, can we get him to say:
“A PLEDGE PIN?!! ON YOUR UNIFORM?!!”
trubble on January 23, 2008 at 8:37 PM
“Thank you for your call, sir.” LOL
When you said he went nuts, I didn’t think you meant he went NUTS. All I could visualize was the spit flying from all sides of his mouth. You could hear it happening, actually.
inviolet on January 23, 2008 at 8:48 PM
Wow. Just. Wow.
The next f’er that says the Fredfolk were like this gets a roasting from the dragon. :)
tickleddragon on January 23, 2008 at 8:52 PM
I love this guy.
FIRST LOOK AT THIS CALLER FOR PRESIDENT?????
muyoso on January 23, 2008 at 8:53 PM
No..that really WASN’T a challenge.
tickleddragon on January 23, 2008 at 8:53 PM
But seriously though, where did this clip come from, who is the caller and how did it find its way to the internet? Seems like a wonderful prank, especially at the end when he flips out and then CALMLY says “except for Ron Paul”.
muyoso on January 23, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Is this guy trying to win over folks?
I am not feeling it.
EJDolbow on January 23, 2008 at 8:57 PM
@ EJDolbow on January 23, 2008 at 8:57 PM
He is either a nut who sounds crazy while trying to support a candidate he likes, or a guy trying to gain fame while hurting someone he disagrees with.
muyoso on January 23, 2008 at 9:02 PM
That. Was. AWESOME!
MikeZero on January 23, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Well, bless his heart.
HerrMorgenholz on January 23, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Well…I’m convinced.
ronsfi on January 23, 2008 at 9:04 PM
I heard this live during the Gunny Bob show on 850am KOA last night. Gunny Bob is retired from the Marines Corps, a 20 year veteran. His webpage where you will find the audio link:
http://www.850koa.com/pages/gunnybob.html
It was not a staged call. “Derek” has called into the show before spewing his blame America / hate our military crap.
olympian2008 on January 23, 2008 at 9:05 PM
That is the norm for Paul supporters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gibKEpBnWxk
William Amos on January 23, 2008 at 9:09 PM
What the hell is a
rich801 on January 23, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Abraham Lincoln had more class than the “only man who can save America”. So did FDR. So do the rest of the Republican candidates in the race. And even the Democrat candidates are much better than the “only man who can save America”.
I wish Ron Paul would just piss off. He makes libertarianism look really bad.
mram on January 23, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Jenny, you know I’d never hurt you. Its just this war and that lying some of a bitch Johnson.
lorien1973 on January 23, 2008 at 9:21 PM
Holy Cow!!
Troy Rasmussen on January 23, 2008 at 9:23 PM
If we are in Iraq because of oil… why are gas prices so high?
Mazztek on January 23, 2008 at 9:27 PM
That’s some sweet, sweet crazy there.
Don Carne on January 23, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Except for Ron Paul.
Sir!
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 23, 2008 at 9:36 PM
OMG… On Gunny’s page…
Monica’s Ex-Boyfriend’s Wife for President!
Mazztek on January 23, 2008 at 9:41 PM
Can you actually prove that that is a Ron Paul supporter? Or that he was talking about the same Abraham Lincoln you’re thinking about? Or is this just a smear job against America’s Greatest Patriot?
amerpundit on January 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM
Nailed it.
Part of the ongoing Federal Reserve/NeoCon(Not all Jew!) conspiracy to pit urban savages (Not all minorities!) against patriotic patriots (Not all White!) in an obvious attempt to impose fiat money throughout the new blood-for-oil empire.
billy on January 23, 2008 at 9:52 PM
I think this is the first time I’ve ever hear anyone claim they were a Taft fan.
AUINSC on January 23, 2008 at 9:53 PM
Some say Lincoln did the most to individual freedoms during his prsidency.
However the crisis to this country was also the greatest during his presidency.
William Amos on January 23, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Its blowback man all BLOWBACK !
William Amos on January 23, 2008 at 9:55 PM
HILARIOUS! For some reason, I was reminded of that scene with Rodney Dangerfield and the wacked-out Prof in “Back to School”. Ron Paul/Dennis Kookinich for Mayberry Dog-Catchers!
dmh0667 on January 23, 2008 at 9:57 PM
That was so friggin’ AWESOME!!!
doubleplusundead on January 23, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Another typical Allah post, dissing the Paul supporters, but never the candidate on the issues.
Yawn…again…
Oh, and good luck with that warmongering, big government platform that lost the House and the Senate in November of 2006!
At least Ron Paul stands for what the Republican platforem used to be.
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:01 PM
platforemplatformFed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Yup.
Where have you been, dude?
Get with the rEVOLution~
billy on January 23, 2008 at 10:03 PM
What exactly IS “warmongering”? I often hear it (usually from the Left, and Paul supporters)
JetBoy on January 23, 2008 at 10:04 PM
Dude, are you kidding? A big fat dude with a big Wilford Brimley stache? He’s awesome!
doubleplusundead on January 23, 2008 at 10:05 PM
YOU DON’T KNOW THE HISTORY OF THE CONSTITUTION, I DO!!!!!
doubleplusundead on January 23, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Why is it Allahs fault that guy is a total maniac? Of course if he wasn’t a total maniac he wouldn’t be the star he is today. You should be glad he’s been given this “platforem” to win us over with. I know I’m sold.
Buttercup on January 23, 2008 at 10:07 PM
He must have been on a hands free phone.
NO ONE could get that worked up and not have their hands flying all over the place. Hope he wasn’t driving at the time!
Jim708 on January 23, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Well JetBoy, “warmongering” is when you lie us into war, as in, “Bush lied us into war, just to warmonger.”
See according to the Constitution, you have to declare war, not lie into one.
billy on January 23, 2008 at 10:09 PM
THAT is the funniest thing I’ve heard since the very first time I heard Richard Pryor describe his brush with death.
Absolutely priceless.
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:10 PM
My guess is that Paul will lose his seat over this national exposure. He won’t become Prez, naturally, but the next election for his seat will find him back home with nothing to do but write racist newsletters.
Warner Todd Huston on January 23, 2008 at 10:12 PM
Hmmmmm…. Anyone tell that to Thomas Jefferson?
.
GT on January 23, 2008 at 10:14 PM
hahahaha perfect!
inviolet on January 23, 2008 at 10:15 PM
Amen to that! And had we waited for the spineless lizards in Congress to declare war we would still be listening to UBL singing about his “Great Victory over the Great Satan” on 9/11.
It’s not Bush’s fault, it’s OUR FAULT for not DEMANDING responsible people into Congress and holding their feet to the fire. We get what we deserve and now we have nothing.
Support Ron Paul for his policies but understand what you are asking for. I’m all for it but I know the VAST majority of Americans are more into Idol and Survivor than what’s best for the country.
Hold to your ideals brother…and build that cabin in the woods cause you’ll be there out of frustration. Don’t worry tho, the rest of us will try to work in the real world to fix things.
We got yer back man.
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:15 PM
A maniac?
A maniac!?!
You won’t think he’s a maniac when the fiat money imperialists have totally enacted their Lincoln-loving platforem all over our (patriotic!) Constitution.
billy on January 23, 2008 at 10:16 PM
I was laughing so hard I almost fell out of my computer chair
Nascar70 on January 23, 2008 at 10:17 PM
I get a general sense that something is just eatin’ at that boy.
Weebork on January 23, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Thanks Pilgrim
billy on January 23, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Fake…but accurate!
Vigilante on January 23, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Dude…calm down with Lincoln bashing will ya? If you hate him for Reconstruction then blame Booth because had Lincoln not been killed the horrors of Reconstruction prolly wouldn’t have happened.
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:22 PM
*sigh* Bush “lied” eh? Just to “warmonger”? Yeah…makes sense.
Congress may not have “declared war”, but they nearly unanimously approved military action against Iraq.
JetBoy on January 23, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Uh…Billy. Its spelled p-l-a-t-f-o-r-m. It has no “e”.
Incidentally, if a President must get a declaration of war from Congress, was the First Barbary War an illegal war? And as such, should Ron Paul hold Jefferson in contempt?
.
GT on January 23, 2008 at 10:22 PM
ringer
redrock on January 23, 2008 at 10:23 PM
and why don’t they use that label with Thomas Jefferson who they worship?
newsflash paultards, when the Congress debates War with a country, points the army at that country and makes “regime change” official policy. They are effectively “Declaring War” on that country, just as the Constitution says. The Constitution gives NO CONTEXTUAL REQUIREMENTS on how its to be done.
that said, its not that cut and dry…..see Thomas Jefferson who never even went to congress in Barbary Wars.
jp on January 23, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Whoa, his voice got a little demonic towards the end there. Anyone think to play it backwards and see what messages might be there?
amkun on January 23, 2008 at 10:23 PM
And now for the tough question, ‘billy’: What’s the Partei Line these days on Das Memos, hmmm? Is it still some nefarious unknown clerk, or did Herr Doktor Paul write those in his sleep? Or aren’t you the type to tell?
Now, why do I see you breathlessly frothing at the mouth on a stage in Munich shouting this amongst all the banners a-wavin’? Sorta like your bud on the audio-clip, huh?
dmh0667 on January 23, 2008 at 10:23 PM
I remember the days when I was the only Ron Paul supporter on this website. Those were the good ole days. Now it seems like other people fight my battles for me. Sigh . . .
muyoso on January 23, 2008 at 10:23 PM
Did Congress not authorize military action against Iraq? What “lies”, btw? Our intelligence said he was pursuing weapons of mass destruction. Our intelligence has been saying that since the 90′s at least.
amerpundit on January 23, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Man that guy just lost it. Even so, though, no need to dog Lincoln.
Spirit of 1776 on January 23, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Yeah some of the Paulites haven’t figured out just how stupid some fellow Republicans are. Some of them beat their head against the wall trying to talk to you bums before our nation goes right down the tubes. I realize for the most part it is a lost cause and don’t get angered by ignorance. Of course an emotional reaction to ignorance is ignorance in and of itself.
Sorry, the market two days ago lost one hundred points after a three quarter rate cut. Welfare warfare states don’t work. Some people also fly off the handle because we are saying the same stuff you superior intellects were saying last decade. We didn’t flip flop. You guys for the most part aren’t conservative. Your foreign policy gurus are people that agreed more with Clinton’s foreign policy than the Republican Congress during the 90s. How did you guys feel about Clinton’s wiretapping bill? Did you guys agree with the warrants used at Waco? Back then we had problems with sloppy warrants, now you superior intellects just want to eliminate them. When did conservatives become Lincoln lovers? Of course if imitation is the highest form of flattery Bush seems to love Wilson the most, with LBJ running a close second.
LevStrauss on January 23, 2008 at 10:25 PM
I’ve heard Paul asked this once by Jason Lewis on the radio. He ranted on that they got “letters of marque and reprisal” instead. Lewis pointed out that Jefferson sent War ships and the Marines into a 4 year long WAR. and of course Letters of Marquee and Reprisal are for mercenaries, not the marines.
jp on January 23, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:10 PM
LOL
When you on fiyah, and you runnin down da street, people WILL get out cha way…
stlpatriot on January 23, 2008 at 10:26 PM
There ya go! I tried to dig up the clip but I can’t find it anywhere(5 minute search so…)
I was a kid when I first heard that and just about wet myself. THIS CLIP had me crying hard…great stuff.
One thing you can’t say about the Paul folks…they gots de passion baby!
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Oh man! that was priceless! I could almost feel the spit hitting my face!
That guy needs to explore the inner peace that ludes can bring.
conservnut on January 23, 2008 at 10:33 PM
I think the caller “whom someday I won’t think is a maniac” is billy
Buttercup on January 23, 2008 at 10:34 PM
jp on January 23, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Yeah but Jefferson had it all wrong. He should have attacked the havens for the pirates, stop midway, and divert all of his resources to occupy Mesopotamia. They’re all islamonazis anyway, right? Oh wait, they weren’t called islamonazis back then. Come to think of it the term “islamofascist” is only like three years old. Yes I seem to remember it gained popular use around the time we went from fight radical Sunni Wahabbis in Afghanistan to fighting secular Sunni dictators while threatening to invade a Shiite nation. So I could see why they use the term islamofascist, who wants to get caught up in all these details. Slogans make us feel better.
LevStrauss on January 23, 2008 at 10:35 PM
From DiLorenzo;
“Jefferson, of all people, was opposed to entangling alliances” and empire. The Barbary states were demanding a ransom in return for allowing shipping to proceed in the Mediterranean. The Adams administration had been paying the ransom, and Jefferson ended that practice. As he saw it, he intervened to protect American life, liberty, property and free trade, which he believed was one of the proper functions of constitutional government. He did not intervene with the intention of occupying any of those countries for one minute, let alone “for a hundred years,” as John McCain recently promised in regard to Iraq.”
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Damn.
It has really gotten to the point where you can’t try to parody a Paul supporter and still not be mistaken for a real one.
And he’s running 5-10% of the Republican Party.
Add in McCain’s 30%, and you wind up with over 1/3 of the Republican party that doesn’t have a clue as to what faces the U.S. in anno domine 2008.
At least the Democrats are more realistic.
..
..
Oh wait.
Nevermind.
billy on January 23, 2008 at 10:36 PM
Same goes to you jp…
“Jefferson, of all people, was opposed to entangling alliances” and empire. The Barbary states were demanding a ransom in return for allowing shipping to proceed in the Mediterranean. The Adams administration had been paying the ransom, and Jefferson ended that practice. As he saw it, he intervened to protect American life, liberty, property and free trade, which he believed was one of the proper functions of constitutional government. He did not intervene with the intention of occupying any of those countries for one minute, let alone “for a hundred years,” as John McCain recently promised in regard to Iraq.”
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:36 PM
Bad ol’ Jefferson. I wonder who was his “Kucinich”.
.
GT on January 23, 2008 at 10:36 PM
With all the cherry picking going on in this thread we’re gonna have one hellova pie in a minute!
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Well, fortunately for me I can’t stand McCain.
That said, keep this in mind. The Democratic-Republican party of Jefferson were the anti-federalists. Imagine their surprise when Jefferson sent US warships to the Barbary Coast.
(/wink)
.
GT on January 23, 2008 at 10:43 PM
You mean these lies?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4174711
from this Bush speechwriter?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d0DKbbv0Lg
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:43 PM
i thought William Eaton had to beg Jefferson to go to war against the Barbery Pirates, and when he finally agreed, Eaton got a payment or 2 then had to fund the rest himself..
Wasn’t this known as the Secret Mission of 1805?
stlpatriot on January 23, 2008 at 10:45 PM
I personally think that an authorization of force could be constitutional, but I think it skirts the original intent and hurts our troops in the short and long run. If Congress has no wiggle room, like they would with a real Declaration of War they would have no one to blame. Even the President himself sold it as a necessary tool for diplomacy. That meant that it was easier to pass and easier to wiggle from supporting later on. Also if it were a real declaration of war and not the diplomatic leverage it was sold as there would have been more scrutiny of the intelligence and the invasion may have been prevented. Seems to me both sides won this compromise, Bush got his war and the Dems got their wiggle room. The only losers are troops and taxpayers.
LevStrauss on January 23, 2008 at 10:50 PM
It’s an interesting debate…but our history books don’t tell us everything…
From the author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History,” Thomas Woods:
“Jefferson consistently deferred to Congress in his dealings with the Barbary pirates. “Recent studies by the Justice Department and statements made during congressional debate,” Fisher writes, “imply that Jefferson took military measures against the Barbary powers without seeking the approval or authority of Congress. In fact, in at least ten statutes, Congress explicitly authorized military action by Presidents Jefferson and Madison. Congress passed legislation in 1802 to authorize the President to equip armed vessels to protect commerce and seamen in the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, and adjoining seas. The statute authorized American ships to seize vessels belonging to the Bey of Tripoli, with the captured property distributed to those who brought the vessels into port. Additional legislation in 1804 gave explicit support for ‘warlike operations against the regency of Tripoli, or any other of the Barbary powers.’”
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:50 PM
Strauss -
Do you really think any Congress since 1941 had the STONES to declare war? They have been all about wiggling out of their responsibilities. I’m not sure WHAT it would take at this point to be honest.
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 10:54 PM
fourstringfuror on January 23, 2008 at 10:54 PM
The US Constitution gives Congress the responsibility for declaring war but it does not specify how such a thing is accomplished. This is where some of these so-called Constitutional experts go off the rails.
Congress authorized the use of force, by majority vote, in Iraq but at the discretion of the President.
That IS a declaration of war. There is nothing in the Constitution that says it has to be some white-wigged affair with white smoke drifting from the Speaker’s podium to signal “WAR!”
If the no-blood-for-oil people are not happy with the nebulous nature of the War Powers provision then they should lobby to change that to something that will satisfy their tender need for peace at any price.
We went from accusations that Bush et al did not “connect the dots” to lying us into a war for oil. Further evidence that the mental gymnastics required to be a moonbat progressive are bizarre and Olympic in nature.
prairiemain on January 23, 2008 at 10:54 PM
Er, w/o the blockquote around that.
fourstringfuror on January 23, 2008 at 10:54 PM
You crack me up. Hahahahahaa.
.
GT on January 23, 2008 at 10:55 PM
If we went to Iraq for oil, why is it still so expensive? Saddam is dead, and Al Qaeda has tucked tail and run. I don’t buy the tired line from the Dr. No supporters that the war in Iraq is for oil. If we really wanted to take control of a foreign asset, we could do it in about two days.
fourstringfuror on January 23, 2008 at 10:57 PM
The Textual Basis for the Presidents Foreign Affairs Powers
thats by Scalia’s former clerk and current Harvard Law Professor. He points out that Jefferson actually did the Hamiltonian view of the Executive.
Jefferson was for the Barbary Wars, atleast 15 years before he sent us to war as the Strong Executive:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/mtjprece.html
a great book about how the founders were NEVER isolationist, came out not long ago. “Dangerous Nation” by Robert Kagan. The very first Foreign Policy move was to create an alliance with France. the ‘entangling alliance’ stuff was meant to convince the people who weren’t wild about detaching from the British empire completely and everything that brought, good and bad, to persuade them politically away from the brits.
jp on January 23, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Awesome. I couldn’t find my copy of Stuff Jefferson Said, but Fed Up has a copy of Stuff Other People Said About Jefferson, which is damn near as good.
Uncle Pinky on January 23, 2008 at 10:59 PM
labwrs on January 23, 2008 at 11:00 PM
prairiemain on January 23, 2008 at 10:54 PM
Doesn’t a piece of paper with the words “Declare war” on it open up other powers? Serious question here.
Pilgrim on January 23, 2008 at 11:02 PM
I actually agree. I believe it was ’72 that the Congress officially abdicated their responsibility – War Powers Act or something like that. Been awhile since I looked tho’ so name or year could, I suppose, be wrong.
Spirit of 1776 on January 23, 2008 at 11:02 PM
Nicely done. (/thumbsup)
.
GT on January 23, 2008 at 11:02 PM
Or more precise Stuff Neo-Confederates Said About Jefferson.
Keljeck on January 23, 2008 at 11:03 PM
jp on January 23, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Did you read, “The Pirate Coast” Thomas Jefferson, the first marines, and the secret war of 1805.. by Richard Zachs?
I’m just halfway through it atm..
stlpatriot on January 23, 2008 at 11:06 PM
the war started in 1801, Jefferson sent the war ships and marines and told them as soon as they were attacked to return fire and start the war. He did this without going to congress and getting a “Declaration of War” first.
you libs would need to prove that the 1973 War Powers Resoltuion Act, that the “Iraq War Resolution” comes from is what is ‘unconstitutional’. nobody has tried to send that to the SCOTUS yet though and its the law on the books. What you are essentially whining about is the POTUS following the law he inherited.
jp on January 23, 2008 at 11:06 PM
a great book about how the founders were NEVER
you didn’t just quote Kagan did you?
I would expect as much from this neocon…
same with the one I posted here:
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Kagan, Kristol, Wolfowitz…you expect me to believe anything these guys write?
unreal…
Fed Up on January 23, 2008 at 11:06 PM
What do the paulites think of the Louisiana Purchase? seems tpo me that was a huge stretch by TJ. Seems to me the he was the first neo-con.
billhedrick on January 23, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »