Paulnuts to run wild at the convention, leading to 7% chaos
posted at 8:09 am on May 12, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
The Paulnuts have not gone away quietly, even as their star fades from the electoral sky. Andrew Malcom reports that supporters of Ron Paul plan to disrupt the Republican convention in St. Paul with a “revolt” against John McCain. While Paul has had a little success undermining the process of delegate selection in Nevada, Malcolm provides little other evidence that Paul will have any significant presence in September, and unfortunately gives life to debunked analysis:
Virtually all the nation’s political attention in recent weeks has focused on the compelling state-by-state presidential nomination struggle between two Democrats and the potential for party-splitting strife over there.
But in the meantime, quietly, largely under the radar of most people, the forces of Rep. Ron Paul have been organizing across the country to stage an embarrassing public revolt against Sen. John McCain when Republicans gather for their national convention in St. Paul at the beginning of September. …
Just take a look at recent Republican primary results, largely overlooked because McCain locked up the necessary 1,191 delegates long ago. In Indiana, McCain got 77% of the recent Republican primary vote, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, who’ve each long ago quit and endorsed McCain, still got 10% and 5% respectively, while Paul took 8%.
On the same May 6 in North Carolina, McCain received less than three-quarters of Republican votes (74%), while Huckabee got 12%, Paul 7% and Alan Keyes and No Preference took a total of 7%. Pennsylvania was even slightly worse for the GOP’s presumptive nominee, who got only 73% to a combined 27% for Paul (16%) and Huckabee (11%).
As Politico.com’s Jonathan Martin noted recently, at least some of these results are temporary protest votes in meaningless primaries built on lingering affection for Huckabee and suspicion of McCain.
And as Congressional Quarterly noted in response, the pattern is nothing different than anything seen in any other race. McCain has been winning meaningless primaries by the same percentages that George Bush won them in 2000, and McCain significantly outperformed Paul in the 2000 races. At that time, no one seriously thought that Bush had an insurgent problem with McCainiacs, because he didn’t — and now McCain doesn’t have a problem with Ronulans, either. Winning 8% of the vote in a state where McCain didn’t campaign and where McCain-supporting Republicans crossed over to keep Hillary in the race isn’t impressive, it’s pathetic.
One look at the delegate count should make the scope of the nascent revolution clear. Paul has won all of 26 delegates. Even if he wangled a few dozen more through manipulations in caucus states like Nevada, at best he’ll come up with 100 delegates in a 2,200-delegate convention. That’s not a revolution, it’s a lunatic fringe.
For some reason, normally sensible people like John Derbyshire continue to put their hope for electoral victory into a candidate who consorted with and exploited racists and anti-Semites for years in order to bolster his political standing. Thankfully, that 7% Revolution will have no impact on the convention or Republican politics. Next time the libertarians want a hero, perhaps they will vet him or her more carefully.
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: [1] 2 »
Why even bother with a convention in the first place? McCain is unfortunately locked in…just have a press conference to announce the VP candidate and save the cash for RNC ads.
James on May 12, 2008 at 8:15 AM
I dispute the notion that John Derbyshire is normally
sensible. He is frequently insightful and frequently funny, but he is like a drunk, eccentric old uncle minus the charm.
BigD on May 12, 2008 at 8:16 AM
Do nut underestimate the ability of these psychos to cause problems at the convention. They are not rational human beings.
bj1126 on May 12, 2008 at 8:21 AM
I have to laugh whenever Republican primary vote statistics are quoted in an effort to prove McCain has weak support. The vote totals are inconsequential because zillions of voters are not bothering to vote in the primary, as McCain already has it locked up. By the time November rolls around, McCain will have more than enough support to win the general. Like a huge portion of the electorate, He (McCain) sure wasn’t my first choice, but he beats the bejesus out of the alternative, and will win in November.
Tim Zank on May 12, 2008 at 8:24 AM
Ron Paul is as dangerous as B. Hussein Obama.
I don’t need racists, marxists or un-acceptable types in leadership positions of authority or influence.
The same applies to Clintons of any generation.
Damn this political system that offers US no good choices!
old trooper on May 12, 2008 at 8:25 AM
1. Bring back states’ Rights
2. Bring back the Bill of Rights
3. Eliminate the IRS
4. Stop wasteful government spending
5. Reduce central government control of people’s lives
6. Monetary policy that’s not a house of cards
The only legitimate gripe against Ron Paul is his foreign policy, but even that doesn’t qualify those who support him as lunatics. Using a pejorative like that requires a much stronger basis than a simple disagreement over which policy is correct. Those on each side of the aisle are so vehement and emotional and passionate, however, that they simply resort to name calling rather than debate the actual issue.
I do not necessarily agree with Ron Paul’s foreign policy. However, I do agree with his smaller government and monetary ideas. McCain has proven himself a lightweight when it comes to economics, and I don’t trust a man who knows less than I do about money to decide money issues for me.
You can call names all you want, but the fact is that those who want smaller government and less control and more freedom are no more lunatics than were Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. “But we are in a war!” you say. That’s no excuse for destroying our personal freedoms.
As far as the isolated incident “He took money from a white supremacist!” argument, whither McCain and La Raza? Exit question: Assuming the United States is successful in defeating or containing terrorism, what does it matter if the country becomes Aztlan?
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 8:29 AM
The Paulnuts have certainly done their best to embarrass libertarians across America. As a moderate libertarian who doesn’t believe the CFR is a zionist conspiracy to steal rEVOLution campaign signs across the country, I offer my special thanks to the nutty Ron Paul supporters, stay classy guys.
LT Nixon on May 12, 2008 at 8:32 AM
So,Paulnuts are going to try a V for Vendetta,anarchy
and chaos at the RNConvention!
These people are “Code Pink” smart,alls that missing
are the time schedule of the anarchy events!
Vel Shultz,vee will make sure zee Paulnuts papers
are inz zee proper order ats zaa convention and
vee shall weed out zee anarchist’s! Ha ha.
canopfor on May 12, 2008 at 8:36 AM
I’d love to see the GOP convention thrown into chaos.
What needs to be pointed out is that McCain will stupidly follow the socialist line that the GOP continues to back, scarily. What happened to the days when they stood for small government, responsible spending, and keep the gubmint out of your life? What happened to that?
I hope that Paul rips the building apart and causes absolute chaos. They deserve it for supporting the socialist line.
RWLA on May 12, 2008 at 8:37 AM
Derbyshire is supporting McCain because he is consorting with La Raza?
I wish the Paulnuts great success. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Valiant on May 12, 2008 at 8:40 AM
Paul is an insane idiot but God Bless his squad of irrational morons for not giving McCain a love-fest where McCain’s idiot supporters gloss over cranky old bastards political treason in the name of “shutting the f**k up and supporting McCain.”
McCain, of course, can blunt this effort by actually selecting a running mate that is acceptable to the real Republicans. It will help his credibility after these past few months of advocating open borders, global warming extremism, and otherwise supporting all the stuff the Democrats want.
highhopes on May 12, 2008 at 8:41 AM
Normally I am very sympathetic to libertarian ideas. But the ostrich approach to foreign policy does not work. Isolationism did not stop Pearl Harbor and having to hold our foreign policy hostage to every nutbag in the world (such as Bin Laden’s objection to US troops in Saudi Arabia) is absurd. I’m not thrilled by it, but have to face the fact that either McCain, The Obamassiah or Clinton will be the next president. I want someone who at least will defend this country from foreign enemies. McCain’s the best bet on that.
rbj on May 12, 2008 at 8:46 AM
What freedoms have you given up because of the war?
Oh and don’t get me started on the gold standard. Talk about house of cards…
bj1126 on May 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM
You’re absolutely right. They’re not lunatics because of Ron Paul’s policy positions…nobody’s saying they are. They’re lunatics because of the things they do to try to drum up support for Ron Paul.
1. The blimp. The blimp, man.
2. Skewing any polls that use technology rather than interviews. I hear Ron Paul is a lock to win both American Idol AND Dancing with the Stars.
3. The crazy light in their eyes when they talk about him. (Yes, my sister is one, so I know what it’s like in person…she converted from being a Kucinich supporter)
4. The way they (you) excuse the ‘isolated incident’ without admitting the years of evidence from his newsletter.
James on May 12, 2008 at 8:48 AM
I voted for Reagan in 84 and will vote for Paul in 2008. I will sit quietly by if John McCain is the most awsome president evah, I promise.
al sends
afterdarknesslight on May 12, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Have you even attempted to listen to what McCain has been advocating since he’s been the nominee? With that comment I would guess not.
Complete7 on May 12, 2008 at 8:52 AM
You need to work on your trash talk there Ed. Wasn’t it you who recently posted the alarming trend of people leaving the R party? Maybe the next time the R party puts up a nomination they will vet him as a conservative (more than just a word).
I agree with fossten. Ron Paul would be 100% better than ANY of the candidates we have to choose from. He wouldn’t increase the size of the government, he wouldn’t increase the scope of the government. Those are conservative characteristics.
McCain won’t win the presidency unless he gets as many Hispanic votes as Obama gets black votes. At least Obama panders to AMERICANS who pay taxes and vote. McCain is pandering to a group of people who aren’t Americans so that he can become the ultimate American. McCain is unacceptable to many lifelong Republicans. Without their support, the only way McCain can actually win is if the whole country is racist - though Obama will likely win NC, SC, and Ga so I guess the racist South isn’t so much.
The Republicans need to put up an alternative to the bigger government Liberals if they want success. Pandering to the left and moving to the center will get them yet another loss. Ron Paul would make a much better president than McCain, Clinton, or Obama. . . but that mainly points to how bad the other three are.
ThackerAgency on May 12, 2008 at 8:54 AM
Heh, I still love that one.
To be honest, I welcome any conservative thinkers who want to shake up this convention. I’m not happy at all with John McCain, and I think the liberal at the convention needs to hear about it. I largely agree with fossten, although his thoughts on decreasing military spending dramatically concern me. Is he talking about leaving the war, and that spending dropping, or cutting it further when we are in a time of peace? The latter would be unacceptable.
Either way, I would rather see some more debates between these two. I think Paul could still make a strong case with a lot of voters.
MadisonConservative on May 12, 2008 at 8:56 AM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KBzJvoS5iJE is something he said in Charlotte about “comprehensive immigration reform”.
Valiant on May 12, 2008 at 8:56 AM
I have listened to cranky old bastard. He lies. He claims he never supported amnesty when he did. He claims that global warming needs to be solved by all the crap the Democrats want- which has no scientific basis. He still thinks I’m racist for wanting the border to be closed before we even start talking about guest worker programs. In short, I am more and more convinced that cranky old bastard is the wrong choice for the nation and GOP.
highhopes on May 12, 2008 at 8:57 AM
Guess what? IT WORKED. Now he has a New York Times #1 Best Seller and has successfully screwed the neocons. Well behaved people rarely change the world - see Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, et al. You’re just bitter that your party imploded.
CRY ME A RIVER.
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 8:58 AM
Who’s bitter? 7% of Operation Chaos’ non-crossing leftovers are the ones sticking it out till the ‘bitter’ end.
James on May 12, 2008 at 9:04 AM
If the moon is made of green cheese, how will it be affected by global warming, and should we welcome the coming Martian invasion?
Buy Danish on May 12, 2008 at 9:05 AM
Talk about using anecdotal evidence to paint with a broad brush, sheesh.
*Credibility meter drops to zero*
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:05 AM
You mean like close Guantanamo Bay or treat enemy combatants as though they have Constitutional rights? How about refusing to act on the insecure borders (you know that the constitutional duty to PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE means securing our borders). Here’s the best one. . . how about indicting our military by saying that we TORTURE people just like John Murtha said - recruiting fuel for Al Qaeda.
McCain is a Democrat. He won’t win because Democrats won’t vote for him (unless they are racist against Obama). McCain is a part of the congress that has the worst approval rating in history and worse than the president. But now somehow we are supposed to hail him as the Republican messiah who is above questioning? Enjoy supporting the next John Kerry over the next 6 months or so. He’ll waste 82 million of taxpayer dollars telling you he’ll stop wasting taxpayer dollars - and then he’ll go back to his post in the Senate (move along, nothing to see here).
ThackerAgency on May 12, 2008 at 9:07 AM
I didn’t mention cutting military spending. In fact, I think military spending is one of the few areas where I’d like to see an increase. We certainly need it to police our borders. However, I would like to see us stop wasting money by keeping troops in places like South Korea, where we’re not needed. NK is not a threat to SK, which has 100 times the economy and 10 times the military.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:09 AM
Criminy. Paul lost. Get over it. He’s not the first guy to lose a primary.
What’s interesting is that the choice of the Republicans is clear. Yes why do I keep hearing about Ronulans who want to sneak in as delegates and then create a ruckus? How is that not an attempt to thwart the will of the voters? What’s “libertarian” about that…..?
JohnTant on May 12, 2008 at 9:11 AM
ZAP! Paul somehow gets the oval office. There he sits with a congress of 55%Dems and 45%Reps.
Welcome to veto override heaven.
Limerick on May 12, 2008 at 9:15 AM
I never sent his campaign money because I thought he’d win. I sent them money so people would still be talking about him and what he stood for.
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 9:16 AM
This is how strange PaulNuts are.
1. most every candidate would say the same
2. no candidate would say eliminate the bill of rights
3. IRS, will never be eliminated, you are wasting your time
4. every candidate wants to stop “wasteful” spending (ask McCain)
5. every candidate wants to reduce government interference (remember out of the bedroom?)
6. every candidate says they want to “fix” the economy (just ask carville)
Paul says nothing more then any other candidate running, he is all mouth and no substance. Just saying what you want to hear. Yeah, every candidate gets up and say they are “wasteful” government spending.
It is the degree that he wants these things. Do you have any idea, any even remote notion of what it would take to dismantle the IRS? That alone precludes him and his followers from any serious consideration.
Change the IRS direction possible, but eliminate it? Oh my, we have some PaulNuts that are cracked.
right2bright on May 12, 2008 at 9:19 AM
Well, according to the Paulbots, he didn’t lose the primaries…they were fixed. Because, you know, the “big media” controls everything.
JetBoy on May 12, 2008 at 9:20 AM
Well, with these antics it pretty much guarantees that “people” won’t be talking about what Ron Paul stands for, but rather the antics themselves and how his supporters are acting like spoiled children. The medium has become the message, and it’s been like that for a long time now.
And that’s assuming Paul’s campaign was ever about what Paul stood for to begin with. His actions make me more and more convinced that this was intended to be about Ron Paul, not his beliefs. A book plug in a quasi-concession address…? Please.
JohnTant on May 12, 2008 at 9:20 AM
Ed - I’m going to quibble here with you slightly. There are some really good conservative Ron Paul supporters. Sensible people who want what most conservatives want….to get government to quit interfering in our daily lives. With those people, I have no complaints.
The ones that I do have complaint with are the ones who paint their candidate as Messiah - the only man who can “save our country” and yet they willfully ignore the inconsistencies in his words versus his deeds. If you take a look at the complete voting record of his time in the House of Representatives, you see that Rep. Paul does not always walk the talk….unless it is convenient or politically necessary for him to do so! For example - his supporters love to tell you what a fiscal hawk Congressman Paul is and yet his Club for Growth ranking has him at 80%! Meanwhile, REAL fiscal hawks (John Kline and Michele Bachman are in the mid to upper 90’s). If Congressman Paul were everything his supporters claimed he was he would be in the HIGH 90’s!
Ron Paul is not messiah - he is a bloody politician! Once that fact sinks in to the rest of his supporters maybe we can come to an accord.
LL
Lady Logician on May 12, 2008 at 9:21 AM
The problem for Paul’s supporters is they just don’t have the 40-plus year history of throwing temper tantrums at public events and being able to play the media like a violin the way those on the far left do.
There will no doubt be a number of those types in Minneapolis as well, and the Ronulans can choose to make common cause with them outside the convention (or inside, if they can swing some extra floor passes). But doing that would rob Paul’s people of the politically virgin-pure status they wear like a badge of honor, in feeling that they are the only real “above politics/above selling out” folks in the room (and it will be easy to figure out who the fake Ronulans are at the convention — just ask them if they agree with Paul’s position on abortion).
jon1979 on May 12, 2008 at 9:22 AM
After reading your post it occurred to me that there’s a lot of similarity in Ron Paul’s supporters and those of Obama.
Oldnuke on May 12, 2008 at 9:25 AM
I will not vote for John McCain. He is almost as socialist as either of the two Democrats - he, like many on this site, only differ in how to use the big hammer of government to pound citizens into line. I do support Ron Paul, and as I have stated on this site many times, the denunciations of Paul’s supporters as lunatics or Paulnuts or Paulbots is as arrogant and elitest as B.H.O. I am going to enjoy sitting back and laughing at all of the Republican-or-bust folks on this site as John McCain attends his first “How to Use Government to ‘Solve’ the Problem of Global Warming” meeting. McCain will NOT move government back in the direction of a Constitutional Republic. He won’t even slow down the departure. I would love to hear an argument in support of McCain that can even claim otherwise. That he is willing to “fight the war on Terror” and he is not Hillary or Obama are not good reasons to vote for him.
How sad and tragic it is that our country has lost its passion and unquenchable thirst for freedom and independence. To see those who are supposed to be the ones who actually do want less government and actually don’t want socialism trashing the only real candidate who does support and defend the Constitution and limited government - I fear all may be lost. Shame on you.
At least I can start a Compact Flourescent Hazmat Cleanup business and get rich off of the idiocracy.
King of the Britons on May 12, 2008 at 9:25 AM
WARNING! Anecdotal evidence (i.e. real experience) ahead: I spent two tours in South Korea…you don’t know crap about the situation there. Statements like this make the ‘Paultard’ epithet completely justified.
North Korea has thousands of artillery pieces in range of Seoul that are already aimed at specific targets. If they want to, they can flatten South Korea’s capital in a matter of hours. US forces are critical to deterring this from happening. We’re both a tripwire and a delaying force to ensure follow-on forces get there in time…we all know it, we’re all briefed on it when we get there. More importantly, though, Kim Jong Il knows it.
Credibility meter indeed.
James on May 12, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Dems: clinton or obama
Reps: McCain
Libertarians: Ron Paul
All parties chose terrible nominees, not just Libertarians.
JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 9:30 AM
Does anyone still doubt now that George Soros and Moveon.org/DailyKos are behind the Paul Campaign? Fact: The Paul Campaign was infiltrated in 3 states by Moveon.org back in the Fall: Wisconsin, California, and most especially Nevada.
Soros & Co. would like nothing more than to greatly embarrass McCain and the Republicans. Follow Paul’s money trail. May lead to some interesting individuals.
Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003
Publisher, MainstreamLibertarian.com
ericdondero on May 12, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Well said.
The foreign policy/military issue is the poison pill for me also. Horray for no tax, no IRS, yada yada yada. As long as the libertarian platform is to hide in your house while your neighbor screams they will never get a vote from me.
Limerick on May 12, 2008 at 9:32 AM
I wouldn’t go so far as to call McCain a Democrat. I’d say his best point is that he’s somewhat to the right of both Hillary and Obama. I wouldn’t be surprised if Lieberman is his pick for VP.
Oldnuke on May 12, 2008 at 9:32 AM
You are not the target of the message. You are a lost cause. The people that blindly assess all of Paul’s and his supporters’ tactics as “crazy” or “pointless” probably still think Cheney is a good guy.
The Libertarian party is winning over hearts and minds of people who don’t have a static mentality. Funny, the Republican party before 2000 usually stood for the exact same principles. How they doin now?
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 9:35 AM
I respect your opinions, R2B, and so my only response is this - Ron Paul is the only man in Congress who has consistently voted these principles.
LOL you spent 2 hours there, and that qualifies you to speak on the entire situation? That’s hilarious. Credibility meter, indeed. My stepson spent a year there and he can back up what I said. So where are you now? Calling names, typical.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Here is some of what McCain is advocating on global warming, courtesy of Drudge. It’s just lovely.
I will not shirk the mantle of leadership that the United States bears. I will not permit eight long years to pass without serious action on serious challenges. I will not accept the same dead-end of failed diplomacy that claimed Kyoto. The United States will lead and will lead with a different approach - an approach that speaks to the interests and obligations of every nation,” he said.
“You would think that if the polar bears, walruses, and sea birds have the good sense to respond to new conditions and new dangers, then humanity can respond as well,” he said.
BigD on May 12, 2008 at 9:37 AM
James said two TOURS. That is 13 months each. NK has 10,000 152mm artillery pieces within striking distance of Seoul.
If you have ever seen a 152/155 go boom you would understand what James was talking about. Seoul would be a pile of splinters.
Limerick on May 12, 2008 at 9:38 AM
Clean your glasses, James, he said two TOURS.Not hours.
Oldnuke on May 12, 2008 at 9:39 AM
I’ve got news for you, the Fredheads feel the same way. If you don’t believe McCain was chosen by the media, you really are delusional.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Oops my bad.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:39 AM
How can we miss the Paultards if they won’t go away?
William Teach on May 12, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Have you all heard that the Paulbots in Washington State have a Training Manual that advises them to “hide” their allegiance to Paul for the upcomming WA GOP Convention?
Stefan Sharansky of SoundPolitics.com out of Seattle broke the story over the weekend. His staff uncovered the secret Manual. You’d be amazed at some of things that are found inside, like pretend you’re a Deano Rossi for Governor supporter by wearing Rossi garments and lapel pins, and don’t mention Ron Paul’s name, and don’t talk about the Iraq War cause “you’ll lose support among Republican regulars.”
The State Coordinator, Maureen something for Ron Paul is now in a world of sh*t for letting the Manual get out.
Here’s the story with excerpts from the Manual.
ericdondero on May 12, 2008 at 9:41 AM
Somebody’s got to be there to pick up the pieces of broken McCainiacs in 2012.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:41 AM
First of all, the sky is not falling.
Second of all, Seoul is not an American city. Why are thousands of GI’s guarding them, not our borders?
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 9:41 AM
In the interest of not quibbling, they were 12 months each.
James on May 12, 2008 at 9:41 AM
I usually agree with you but on this one I must disagree. Either Hillary or Obama would be the perfect candidate for what the Democrat party has become.
Oldnuke on May 12, 2008 at 9:42 AM
The theory is that if we don’t guard South Korea, the Japanese will be forced to arm themselves against a belligerent North Korea. We don’t want that, because of WWII.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 9:45 AM
Exactly my point. Paulbots are willing to trade lives for a world of no tax returns. I’ll pass.
Limerick on May 12, 2008 at 9:45 AM
I googled your name and came up with this story of your personal experience with Ron Paul.
Great stuff - thanks!
Buy Danish on May 12, 2008 at 9:49 AM
Incorrect. Thank you for putting words in my mouth.
If you must know, I’m currently planning to vote Obama (do I technically get banned for saying that? oh well). Want to know why? So OUR boys, AMERICAN soldiers will have a better chance to come home to their families. I have dozens of friends and family in a warzone right NOW who don’t know if they will come home alive or with all their limbs.
My taxes will go up. I have accepted this. But my vote may save the lives of my loved ones.
Don’t you DARE tell me how I regard life. YOU SIR, crossed the line.
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 9:51 AM
Sorry, but I am the target of the message, being that Ron Paul was running for the Republican nomination and I am a Republican. I’m the kind of guy he has to win over. And frankly, having a small cadre of speed-dialers to game text and online polls is a childish antic, as was the blimp, the proposal to sponsor a boxer, and yes, the efforts to sneak delegates into the convention under false pretenses. That says to me Paul is an unserious candidate with unserious supporters.
If you want people to talk about the message instead of the medium, make the argument instead of wasting everyone’s time on theater.
JohnTant on May 12, 2008 at 9:52 AM
Like the guy on HowISpentMyStimulus.com who bought 42 copies of his book. Call me crazy, but I’m thinking he’s not the only one amongst Paul’s supporters.
The “lunatic fringe” part comes in mainly with his supporters. I disagree with Paul’s foreign policy, but he’d be much more approachable if not for his supporters.
amerpundit on May 12, 2008 at 9:53 AM
LOL indeed. He said tours not hours.
Buy Danish on May 12, 2008 at 9:54 AM
When you start trying to bring my son out of Iraq you might find yourself with a fight on your hands.
Take your head in the sand, I don’t care about anyone but me attitude and vote for Paul until the sky opens and he is sitting in the Oval Office. In the mean time I’ll be happy knowing that the sky will never open.
Limerick on May 12, 2008 at 9:55 AM
I agree.
Pulling our troops out of Iraq is not what I think is best for our national security, but President George H.W. Bush didn’t finish the job in Iraq, either. We would have to go back in the long term, and fight a tougher battle when we do, but leaving wouldn’t immediately destroy our country (although it would probably allow Iraq’s oil production to be controlled by the Iranians).
I think the Ron Paul supporters deserve our respect, not our condemnation. They are standing up for what has always made our country great.
Ron Paul is the only candidate still challenging McCain. He and his supporters are the only force to “anchor” McCain to the right. Without them, I believe McCain would slide even further left between now and the convention.
If Ron Paul isn’t a threat, why do you care what he and his supporters do?
In a free market economy, competition is good and results in a better outcome for the consumer. Since we won’t have an official nominee until the convention, why not support some competition for McCain until then? You don’t have to support the Ron Paul campaign, but I think it is in our best interest to support (or at a minimum tolerate rather than berate) those who do support the Ron Paul campaign because at a minimum it will keep McCain from sliding further left.
Red Pill on May 12, 2008 at 9:56 AM
Two tours. If I’m right with my little military knowledge, I believe that translates to more than a year.
amerpundit on May 12, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Now I’m making an assumption here, like you did previously, but I’m calling attention to it outright.
As I understand it, the reason you will have to fight to get your son home is because of the people to his right and left. If they were gone too, and he had no one to - very bravely I might add - risk his life for, I’m sure he’d be quite happy to return home. This is the consensus of soldiers I speak with.
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 9:59 AM
I hope the aliens take him back home first.
WisCon on May 12, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Why does this matter? Everyone knows McCain’s position on Global Warming. I don’t particularly like his position but he will definitely be better on it then Obama. It’s too late to whine and cry about McCain. He’s already the nominee and you have two choices: support him or Obama. Sitting out or voting third party is effectively voting for Obama.
Complete7 on May 12, 2008 at 10:01 AM
The dozens of friends and family you have in the warzone in Iraq want you to vote for Obama so they can come home?
This is what they told you,and told you to do? They are voting for Obama as well I presume.
Obama and his supporters are my enemies. You SIR, crossed the line.
JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Indeed.
When and why did they volunteer to be in the military?
Red Pill on May 12, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Soros & Co. would like nothing more than to greatly embarrass McCain and the Republicans.
The Republicans are doing a GREAT job of embarassing themselves with earmarks, drinking the global warming Kool Aid, foot tapping in airport bathrooms, and nominating 900 year old fossils. They don’t need Soros’ help in that manner.
RWLA on May 12, 2008 at 10:07 AM
Qper on May 12, 2008 at 10:11 AM
I agree. I find myself in agreement with Paul on issues much more often than I’m in agreement with McCain.
Maxx on May 12, 2008 at 10:15 AM
I hope they do raise hell at the convention on the subject of illegal immigtation and amnesty. McCain is supposed to be a national defence candidate, but he ignores the biggest immediate threat to our way of life out there.
Anchor babies, amnesty, open borders, all are a pending disaster to the U.S., and McCain is too snow blind to see it. Just another shameless politician pandering to potential new voters (if he farms them properly with plenty of fertilizer and manure.
saiga on May 12, 2008 at 10:16 AM
What personal freedom have you lost because of the war?
paul006 on May 12, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Wow. And I thought only Democrats and feminists could be so nasty. Geez people, knock off calling the RP supporters names already!
Dark-Star on May 12, 2008 at 10:16 AM
You talking to me, or Rev. Wrong and his followers? LMAO!
JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 10:19 AM
the interesting thing about Derbyshire is that he was all over Rev. Wright, declared Obama finished over it, etc. Yet when Paul has arguably worse attached to him with his Name on it unlike Obama.
a portion of Paul supporters only hear and see what they want to.
jp on May 12, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Still waiting to hear if your friends/family in Iraq asked you to vote Obama so they could come home.
Or are you just letting us all know how strongly you “feel”, like a good little libtard? If it wasn’t for others, who you care so deeply about, you’d probably be behind actually winning in Iraq.
You SIR, are a joke. This thread has gone EAST,so I will abandon it now.
JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Please spare me the cliched responses to anything critical of McCain. We’ve been hearing these lines since halfway through the primary and they’re old. They’re also insultingly presumptuous — I am neither whining nor crying, and I never suggested sitting out or voting third part. And I have plenty of choices, thank you.
BigD on May 12, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Paul is a moveon.org leftist nut on Foreign Affairs. a Moral Relavtivist of the absolute worst kind in the arena and I don’t find him all that anti-war but Anti-American. To be anti-war, by definition, you’d spend sometime criticizng the Jihadist and their actions and Long history…he could even go back to Thomas JEfferson’s Barbary Wars.
I think these types are “Anti-Liberty Libertarians” at heart. They don’t understand liberty in its full scope, realities of the world, etc. To them there is only individual liberty, the concept of collective liberty(i.e. national security, peace, etc.) flies right over there heads. It has ALWAYS, back to George Washington’s days, had to balance between the two. Things like the Patriot Act and Terrorist Surveillance now….back then the “Alein and Seditions Act”, seizing US Mail headed for who they thought might be British Spies, etc.
in short, they are Constitutional illiterates and Historical dunces…i.e. Cranks.
jp on May 12, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Depends. If I’m ever arrested for any reason, and the government claims that I’ve committed an act of terrorism, I get no Miranda rights. By the way, Congress is considering a bill that will make certain types of speech equivalent to terroristic acts.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 10:25 AM
So what the heck is Pauley Walnuts planning on doing at the convention, show up with his followers all wearing tinfoil hats humming the theme song to “Star Trek”? This guy is proving more and more that he would be more at home wearing a straitjacket in a nice quiet padded cell than he would be calling the shots at the White House!
pilamaye on May 12, 2008 at 10:26 AM
anyone up for a counter protest to the Paultards at the convention? If they do this? The media would be forced to cover both sides and we could then expose the truth about Ron Paul and his zeolots. They’d look like absolute idiots.
jp on May 12, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Emo and then cut and run. Very typical.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 10:26 AM
lets take your argument as fact. What is your plan? Islamic Jihadist living amongst us plotting acts of war, posing as citizens with the ability to take all of your Freedom away, ruin our Economy(Economic Liberty) and possibly your LIFE itself. You have the goods on them, do you lie and claim what they are doing is a Crime and let the ACLU defend them and make a mockery of our legal system OR call them what they are, enemy combatants committing/plotting ACTS OF WAR??
put up or shut up, whats your plan?
jp on May 12, 2008 at 10:29 AM
do any paultards even know about the “Alien and Seditions Act”??? Do you know who was in charge when it passed, and was never overturned as “Unconstitutional”???
what’s worse, the Alien and Seditions Act or the Patriot Act??? One is far more extreme than the other, as far as I’m concerned Bush after 9/11 was very reasonable and very Pro-Liberty in taking measures against our enemies.
jp on May 12, 2008 at 10:31 AM
I know. But unfortunately, they are the least of our problems. Good luck.
JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 10:34 AM
There has got to be a way to protect ourselves without shredding the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments in the process. I don’t claim to be a legislator or a lawyer, but pressing the panic button doesn’t ever result in good legislation. Clearly there wasn’t an effort to protect our rights in the first place, or there wouldn’t have been so many legal challenges to the PATRIOT ACT.
And no, I don’t have to shut up. Your premise is faulty.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Your outrage is very selective indeed.
JianxiDad was mimicking a comment made by a whiny Obama supporter but curiously you had not a thing to say about that.
Buy Danish on May 12, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I read the comment from the Obama supporter. He said “YOU SIR, are over the line.” That’s a comment on his statement, not ad hominem. “YOU SIR are a joke” is ad hominem.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 10:41 AM
Christ. I stick up for Ron Paul and the Obama supporters come out of the woodwork.
This is why I won’t vote for him even if he’s on the ticket. Congratulations. I’m writing in Fred Thompson.
MadisonConservative on May 12, 2008 at 10:42 AM
This is the problem with Ron Paul threads: All the name callers come out of the woodwork and lay about them with the surgical precision of a sledge hammer. Almost nobody actually debates any actual issues. I think Ed and AP do this just for kicks, knowing that nothing substantive will come from it. It’s just sparring material used to manifest the immaturity of conservatives.
fossten on May 12, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Do you mean the kind of name calling like B. Hussain Obama and McShamnesty or lunatic?
AprilOrit on May 12, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Um, I was referring to the fact that you whined that JianxiDad ‘cut and ran’.
Buy Danish on May 12, 2008 at 11:07 AM
pathetic, lunatic fringe. Perfect description of the Ronulans. What’s truly pathetic is that the GOP voters in his congressional district rewarded his pathetic lunacy by choosing him to be their candidate for the House again this year.
funky chicken on May 12, 2008 at 11:08 AM
If Paul was around during the days of Washington andd Jefferson, he would’ve been either hung for Treason or challenged to a duel and shot by a real man. Over his worldview and anti-americanism.
I can hear him now, “John Adams is a Monarchist, worse than King George. His Alien and Seditions act has taken away our liberty, blah, blah…”
“Thomas Jefferson is a war mongering fool, its our fault that the Islamic pirates and their city state sponsors attack us, we make them. Its not Jihad, its US policy. If we simply disarm they will let us trade freely with the, the Pirates will just go way and we will have happy land”..
jp on May 12, 2008 at 11:08 AM
LOL monetary policy LOL those damn Jooz again.
funky chicken on May 12, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Why. The. Hell. Are. You. Here.
You just smeared all conservatives as immature.
MadisonConservative on May 12, 2008 at 11:11 AM
CDS + MDS = Paultard
I think Drudge is one of those, actually. Or his CDS + MDS = Obamatron
funky chicken on May 12, 2008 at 11:14 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »