Now there's a message that is sure to fall on death ears. ;-)
The scariest thing about Ron Paul are some of his followers: he's somehow managed to capture hardcore extremists from both the right and the left, which is no mean feat (although, it does support a hypothesis of mine that extremists from both sides have more in common with each other by virtue of their "extremeness" than they do with more moderate members of their respective political groups). Paul has also managed to attact a disproportionately high number of unclassifiable lunatics.
We actually had one left-winger on campus writing to the school newspaper excoriating Ron Paul because he was afraid (and he stated this in his articles) that Paul was going to take votes away from Kucinich (like Kucinich ever had even the most remote chance). How's that for messed up?
Caution is required when interacting with Ron Paul supporters, though, because some them actually seem to be dangerous. I'm actually thankful for the signs and whatnot because I find it useful to have a warning that I might be dealing with a potential lunatic.
I admit that is exceedingly disturbing for me to have to so vehemately reject a candidate who is "for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies" (which is certainly what I think we need), but some of the things Ron Paul would try to do are too extreme, he has allowed his name to be sullied by association with truly vile writings, and he tolerates way too much nuttiness in his followers.
I was only half-kidding in my prior comment that some of these followers might riot and/or commit mass suicide when he finally gives up. I am suspicious that fear of some sort of "incident" is part of the reason he hasn't thrown in the towel yet.
Seriously? I doubt the Ron Paul supporters are anything compared to the mindless zombies prepared to usher McCain in. At least with the former there is some interest in positive change. With the latter, we'll only be heading down the same economic path we're heading down now.
I do not dispute that McCain represents more of the same old nonsense and that his "enthusiastic" followers are anything other than mindless zombies, but I prefer mindless zombies to some (the key word here and in my previous comment is "some") of the hardcore zealots that Paul has had the misfortune to attract.
I would wager that Ron Paul would have done significantly better (might even be a contender now) if he'd made more of an effort to distance himself from some of his more pernicious supporters. By choosing to ignore the problem (or at least not responding to it vigorously enough) he has done nothing but give his competitors and detractors ammunition to use against him. This is not the only reason his campaign has all but failed, but it has been a contributing factor.
Kind of like the Guilliani people a little over a month ago. He never had a snowballs chance in hell. Guillinai was a supporter of gay marriage, gun control, and murder.
You haven't gotten around to answering any of my questions? You know, the ones about how you can validate sneaking and trying to provoke cheap confrontation. Is it a passive/aggressive thing? Do you only get your jollies if you leave a snarky anonymous comment and run away? Doesn't it seem the least bit cowardly to you? Or are you past--excuse me--beyond all such considerations?
What's wrong? Are you shy?
You're not a Ron Paul supporter, are you? If you are, I can use you to buttress one of my arguements--it's not so terrible to be useful, is it?
Tell me, you wouldn't happen to be associated with a white nationalist or christian identity movement, would you? I only ask because they typically use rhetoric similar to yours regarding homosexuals and moderate Republcians.
6 comments:
Now there's a message that is sure to fall on death ears. ;-)
The scariest thing about Ron Paul are some of his followers: he's somehow managed to capture hardcore extremists from both the right and the left, which is no mean feat (although, it does support a hypothesis of mine that extremists from both sides have more in common with each other by virtue of their "extremeness" than they do with more moderate members of their respective political groups). Paul has also managed to attact a disproportionately high number of unclassifiable lunatics.
We actually had one left-winger on campus writing to the school newspaper excoriating Ron Paul because he was afraid (and he stated this in his articles) that Paul was going to take votes away from Kucinich (like Kucinich ever had even the most remote chance). How's that for messed up?
Caution is required when interacting with Ron Paul supporters, though, because some them actually seem to be dangerous. I'm actually thankful for the signs and whatnot because I find it useful to have a warning that I might be dealing with a potential lunatic.
I admit that is exceedingly disturbing for me to have to so vehemately reject a candidate who is "for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies" (which is certainly what I think we need), but some of the things Ron Paul would try to do are too extreme, he has allowed his name to be sullied by association with truly vile writings, and he tolerates way too much nuttiness in his followers.
I was only half-kidding in my prior comment that some of these followers might riot and/or commit mass suicide when he finally gives up. I am suspicious that fear of some sort of "incident" is part of the reason he hasn't thrown in the towel yet.
Seriously? I doubt the Ron Paul supporters are anything compared to the mindless zombies prepared to usher McCain in. At least with the former there is some interest in positive change. With the latter, we'll only be heading down the same economic path we're heading down now.
I do not dispute that McCain represents more of the same old nonsense and that his "enthusiastic" followers are anything other than mindless zombies, but I prefer mindless zombies to some (the key word here and in my previous comment is "some") of the hardcore zealots that Paul has had the misfortune to attract.
I would wager that Ron Paul would have done significantly better (might even be a contender now) if he'd made more of an effort to distance himself from some of his more pernicious supporters. By choosing to ignore the problem (or at least not responding to it vigorously enough) he has done nothing but give his competitors and detractors ammunition to use against him. This is not the only reason his campaign has all but failed, but it has been a contributing factor.
Kind of like the Guilliani people a little over a month ago. He never had a snowballs chance in hell. Guillinai was a supporter of gay marriage, gun control, and murder.
Hey Anonymous, welcome back. We missed you.
Anonymous, buddy!!!
How have you been?
You haven't gotten around to answering any of my questions? You know, the ones about how you can validate sneaking and trying to provoke cheap confrontation. Is it a passive/aggressive thing? Do you only get your jollies if you leave a snarky anonymous comment and run away? Doesn't it seem the least bit cowardly to you? Or are you past--excuse me--beyond all such considerations?
What's wrong? Are you shy?
You're not a Ron Paul supporter, are you? If you are, I can use you to buttress one of my arguements--it's not so terrible to be useful, is it?
Tell me, you wouldn't happen to be associated with a white nationalist or christian identity movement, would you? I only ask because they typically use rhetoric similar to yours regarding homosexuals and moderate Republcians.
Post a Comment