Ron Paul and his cheering cultists on the Daily Show are making me sick.

[white_wolf]

Seriously, am I the only one sick of Ron Paul and his cult-like followers?

[Kennah]

1. Guess I'm #2

[banned from Kos]

2. I agree 100% - they are cultists. But I am a skeptic so all others

seem like cultists to me.

[FarLeftFist]

3. #4 here.

[laconicsax]

4. Recommend.

[Worship Money]

5. I used to be

But I realized that it's so pathetic, that they're barely noteworthy at worst and comical at best.

Most of so called Ron Paul supporters are nouveau-hipsters and intellectual riffraff. I do respect that some of his supporters are there because they THINK he is ideologically pure and is actually consistent in his principles. This, hypothetically, is admirable.

However, they either ignore or can't see that their boy has completely sold out to the neo-cons. Which of course is smart if it works, because everyone thinks you're pure while you get the functional benefit of actually NOT being so.

So it's really just a big joke now. They are a parody of themselves. Moving along....

[ellisonz]

35. I think "intellectual riff-raff" is a good description.

Welcome! :donut:

[white_wolf]

6. Holy shit! Paul just said the Industrial Revolution wasn't a true free-market?

He is truly nuts. You know people call me being utopian for being a Marxist, but Ron Paul and his fantasies have to be the most utopian thing I've ever heard.

[DrunkenBoat]

26. don't you mean dystopian? because his perfect world = a dickensian dystopia.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Well he is a fan of the OTHER modern Utopia:

and yes both are...

:hi:

And he is also a market fundamentalist... and would make Thatcher blush and take my word on this, she made Ronnie look like a dang Commie. No, I am not kidding.

[truedelphi]

55. I only learned over the lst six months that

Thatcher initially ran on two slogans -- "Hope" and "Change"

If I had known that in 2008, I would have been far more skeptical of Mr Obama.

[Overseas]

41. Because we had tariffs that protected our manufacturing jobs and when our rivers caught fire

we started the dang EPA, and the darn OSHA imposed health and safety regulations just because workers were killed and injured on the job, and seniors weren't allowed to just go ahead and die quickly in poverty and homelessness if they had chosen jobs without pensions... etc.

[Marie Marie]

7. The more you hear him speak beyond the sound bites of "end the wars"

the crazier he sounds. Clueless!!

[Johonny]

8. Talk to one once

they got mad at me when I challenge their beliefs. They clearly did not understand how our government worked nor how much of US industry requires our government to function. It was very much like talking to someone that is in a cult.

[glarius]

9. I wish Jon Stewart didn't admire him for his "consistancy"

I love Jon, but I didn't particularlly like the way he handled nutty Ron Paul.

[white_wolf]

10. Yeah, me either.

Jon did make a few good points, like when he pointed out that no libertarian society has ever existed. His line about admiring him for his consistency really annoyed me too, though.

[banned from Kos]

16. but there are lots of RP goldbugs that post here as liberals

lots and lots - including that whole fucked up Max Keiser cabal.

[provis99]

11. and Ron Paul is both inconsistent and a hypocrite.

so the Ass-Kisser in Chief Stewart is wrong about that, too.

[Dokkie]

13. so you dont think

he is consistently anti war, pro civil liberty and wrong on the economy?

[bullwinkle428]

17. How does the "pro-civil liberties" stance square with his ardent anti-abortion position?

[LeftyMom]

19. I'm pretty sure you can't be a civil libertarian and a flaming racist, either.

But he'll totally stick up for oppressed white dudes, provided they're not poor.

[MicaelS]

46. Because the core tenant of Paul's brand of libertarianism

Is the Non-Aggression Principle. Thus, it is immoral for a person to commit an act of aggression against someone who has not committed aggression first. Self-defense is perfectly acceptable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_abortion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarians_for_Life

http://www.l4l.org/

Personally I think Paul is full of crap. He's claims he's very religious, and I think this is just his way to sneak his brand of religion by an attempt at a "logical" back door.

[white_wolf]

20. Wasn't Ron Paul supported by the guy who runs Stormfront?

Which makes sense, since Ron Paul is opposed to the the 1964 civil rights act. Yeah he's a real civil libertarian, at least for rich people.

[provis99]

21. he is against all abortion (so much for women's choice),

-he brings home pork barrel projects for his district. He requested $400 millions worth of pork in 2007(so much for government being bad)
-he wants pork in his own district, but votes against federal disaster relief when disasters hit other states
-he is opposed to labor unions (so much for freedom of association)
-he's voted against veterans' benefits but gets projects done in his district by the Army Corps of Engineers
-he claims to be a doctor and scientist but denies evolution is real
-he has gone on record as favoring term limits but not for himself (he has served ten terms so far),
-he claims to support the Constitution but doesn't believe in separation of church and state
-he denounced the Republican Party in 1987 (and compared Reagan to Stalin), but when he flopped as the Libertarian candidate in 1988, went back to being a Republican
-he claims to be in favor of a market-based health care system, yet voted for the Medicare D prescription drug plan in 2007

that should be enough.

and you think he's right on the economy? Only a loony would think that.

[Dokkie]

22. oops one slipped

I give you $1m if you can prove this

-he claims to be in favor of a market-based health care system, yet voted for the Medicare D prescription drug plan in 2007

Anyway, I dont know enough about him to comment on the rest but if theres anything close to being consistent in the political world, then his name is on the list. Dont get me wrong here, his economic policies would kill whatever left of the middle class but to suggest hes not consistently anti war is just ludicrous

[provis99]

23. you owe me one million: put it in my Swiss bank account.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll023.xml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXQHDPbXmi4

[Dokkie]

33. Medicare part D wasn't passed in 2007

whatever that vote in 2007 is must be some kind of fix to the bill. I owe you $1m if he voted for the creation of he original program. Its like saying he supports medicare and medicaid because he has voted for yea on issues regarding medicare.

[provis99]

28. I take it you're welshing on a bet.

Something I'd expect from someone whose profiles says he enjoys trolling.

[Dokkie]

34. srry buddy

But I aint changing it. I am actually a troll in real life :)

[Major Nikon]

29. Consistently batshit crazy doesn't score any points in my book

The small minority of positions he takes that might be worthwhile don't outweigh the plethora of crazy shit he comes up with.

Paul voted against, the original Medicare prescription drug plan act in 2003. The vote in 2007 regarded the drug price negotiation bill.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2003/roll332.xml

[xoom]

38. These are great! Where did you find this info?

[freshstart]

59. Add this one

Ron Paul hired Doug Bandow as an advisor to his campaign in '08. I'm pretty sure he's still connected to the campaign and Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty.

"If anyone was wondering what effect Ron Paul's new hires like Doug Bandow or Daniel McCarthy were having on Ron Paul's campaign"
http://reason.com/blog/2008/02/08/ron-paul-at-cpac

And lookie who Bandow (from Cato) has been tied to in the past....Jack Abramoff. He was writing op-eds favorable to Abramoff's criminal causes for cash.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/dec2005/nf20051216_1037_db016.htm

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_405491.html

Bandow has history with Ron Paul...this article from 2002 from Ron Paul's Freeman....calling Social Security a Ponzi Scheme....so no Rick Perry didn't invent that phrase and Ron Paul was connected to Bandow prior to the Abramoff issue.
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/uncle-sams-retirement-scam/

And Bandow is singing Ron Paul's praises all over the place:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2011/05/30/standing-for-individual-liberty-and-limited-government-ron-and-rand-paul/

[freshstart]

58. Yes he is....as most of them are.

Ron Paul must have been confused about our system of government in the 70s.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=bgFaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ukoNAAAAIBAJ&pg=6913,1208676&dq=ron+paul+shadow+government&hl=en

And I can't understand why people consistently miss all of his ties to the Koch brothers. These organizations are all tied to the Kochs on Ron Paul's website:
http://www.free-nefl.com/html/nefl.html

And check this out, Charles Koch used of all things...Social Security to lure Von Hayek back to the US.
http://exiledonline.com/exiled-exclusive-read-the-orignal-letter-charles-koch-sent-to-friedrich-von-hayek-telling-him-to-sign-up-for-social-security/

[Worship Money]

12. Stewart is likeable enough

But he has a tendency to do/say ignorant things.

That stupid rally for sanity thing, for one. Trying to portray both sides as EQUALLY crazy. I think people underestimate how damaging that was in veiling the right wing's true nature for a while longer.

[lame54]

39. that rally rocked...

4 hours of great entertainment boiled down to a couple video clips

[Hissyspit]

14. I almost wrote those exact words as an OP last week.

F'ing sick of that nasty man.

[KT2000]

15. Want free-markets?

head to som eof the African countries where even the judges and their decisions are for sale.
Want to get rid of regulations? Go to Haiti
So says and economist speaking on C-Span a couple weeks ago.

[Bigmack]

18. Wait... wait... Ron Paul can't hurt us....

but he's like sand in the Vaseline for the Repubs. Nothing will run smooth with that loose cannon careening around the deck.

I think we should encourage him.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. If we could get some actual LIBERALS to argue for long-overdue sanity like legalizing pot

you would see a lot of the paul cultists fade away, fast.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

25. I bet many of those cheering cultists would say they are liberals too

Ron Paul seems to just make people dumb.

[woo me with science]

43. Maybe instead of insulting them,

our party could offer them something.

:eyes:

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

45. Ron Paul is not a liberal, he's a true conservative.

Anyone who says they're a liberal and supports him is dumb and clearly doesn't do a fig of research. Sorry if you don't like that. It has nothing to do with what our party is offering them (which I agree is not much), it has everything to do with the fact they are trying to be a hipster by supporting a guy who's "outside the box". David Duke's outside the box too, maybe they should back him as well. There are many people who say they like Ron Paul who don't know a fucking thing he stands for beyond being an "outsider" and "not part of the machine". Guy's got the most amazing bullshit shovel of all time.

[woo me with science]

47. You are missing the point.

Yes, there is a lot of crap in what he is selling. There are also nuggets of the very few things that really mean something to people right now.

People are angry as hell that the two major parties have abandoned them on these issues.

Again, whining about Paul is accomplishing nothing. You should be glad that SOMEONE is talking about ending the wars.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

49. So his position on one issue is enough to support him?

Again, David Duke is against the war as well. Does that make him worth supporting?

What stance on the economy has Ron Paul taken that you find to be in line with liberal values?

[woo me with science]

50. Oh stop that.

Stop trying to put words in my mouth and READ what I actually wrote.

Sheesh.

Nobody said to SUPPORT him. I said that the whining threads about him are ridiculous. We can LEARN something from him.

This party is developing an infantile, knee-jerk habit of pointing and saying everybody else sucks without acknowledging the FACT that we currently suck ourselves.

"Yeah, well who else ya gonna vote for?" is not an inspiring or winning campaign strategy.

I am telling you to open your eyes and realize WHY Paul is getting support. We need to clean up our own fucking house.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

51. I told you WHY he's getting support

1) There are plenty of his true believers who love his "I've got mine, fuck everyone else" and "Cut the spending, stupid" stance. Not liberal, nor progressive.

2) There are a lot of others who don't know what the hell he stands for other than "He's different".

I will absolutely "whine" if that's what you choose to call it about a man to whom Ayn Rand is a compass. As if the problem in this country is we haven't followed her thinking enough.

[woo me with science]

53. And it's Group *2 that you need to be thinking about,

because THAT is the group that is growing by leaps and bounds as people become more desperate with the direction of this country.

There will always be the hardcore libertarians who want no government at all.

But we are talking about a groundswell here of ANGRY people who see the wars and the profiteering and don't know what the hell to do. We had a Democratic President swept in on a mandate with two houses of Congress, yet we have been living Bush III. OF COURSE some of them leap to Ron Paul.

But they could be Democrats...if the Democratic Party had anything to offer them.

Quit insulting them. Reach out to them. And work like hell to make your party do the same.

[woo me with science]

52. And one more point, which I think is the most important.

By leaping immediately to the insults toward Ron Paul supporters, even while acknowledging that many of them would probably consider themselves "liberals" on at least the war issue, you rule out ANY chance of convincing them that the Democratic Party has anything to offer them.

We are in deep shit right now in this country. Both major parties are fellating the corporations and funding the wars. Fully 70 to 80 percent of the American people are fed up with it.

You have an opportunity to appeal to the MASSES on these particular issues - the wars and financial transparency/accountability - strictly by the numbers. And you can offer these issues in packaging a hell of a lot more palatable than what Ron Paul has to offer. You have an opportunity to say, "Hey, not only do WE DEMOCRATS want to end the war for profit and make the banks accountable, we ALSO want to make sure that this country has safety nets in place to care for our poor and elderly. We will make sure those are protected."

Can you imagine how popular that message could be, if anyone cared to take on the establishment in order to make it?

But, no. Instead of reaching out ACROSS party to these 70 to 80 percent who care desperately about many of the same issues you do, you insult them, label them as freaks, and drive them away from ever considering that the Democratic Party cares what they think.

People out there are getting desperate. They see a pattern of war and profit by the rich in this country that has them enraged and terrified for themselves and their kids. The reason the rich warmongers keep getting away with it, is because of exactly this kind of demonizing of each other.

How did the Democratic Party become Neocon Party II? How did that happen? Because of the Third Way and the DLC. But you perpetuate the image, you enable it, when you automatically dismiss everyone who may leap to Ron Paul out of desperation as an "idiot." They are Americans, too, and believe it or not, you probably agree on a lot, with many of them.

There is a hunger out there for a party that will take the country back for the people, and the frustrated masses who would fill it, are currently now partially in Ron Paul's crowds.

I am trying to soften my tone now, but this whole thing makes me so angry. I apologize if my words were intemperate. But we need to OFFER these people something, not insult them.

Right now, we are Republican Party II.

[Initech]

27. The words "avoid" and "plague" come to mind.

I'm so sick of Ron Paul - the sad thing is he is the best that the GOP has to offer, but he's not the best person qualified for the job. The only people in my group of friends who are voting for Ron Paul are the die-hard conspiracy theorists. That goes to say a lot. :tinfoilhat:

[MisterP]

30. there's considerable overlap with 1) fundies and 2) Zeitgeisters

who are just repackaged LaRouchies (as are the Paulistas) with their "Second Dark Age or New Renaissance?" crapola and fears of an Elizabethan bankers' cabal restoring feudalism...

[hulka38]

32. At least he isn't trying to out bomb the neocons

like some Commanders-in-Chief I know.

[HughBeaumont]

36. Right here too!

Love how his privileged white guy following will blather on and on about how great he is because of his anti-war stance (for all the wrong reasons) but conveniently ignore (or disagree with) the fact that market fundamentalism was responsible for wholesale prosperity slaughter of the American and British working/middle/poor throughout the last 3 decades. I'm supposed to support this anti-choice loon WHY?

[KurtNYC]

37. TDS puts RW guests in front of a LW audience

all the time. John McCain did like 13 appearances on TDS.

Can they not book some centrist or LW guests ??

[HappyMe]

40. They are so weird and crazy, it's kind of

at the point where they are funny.


But yeah, I am sick of them.

[woo me with science]

42. Okay, but where is our DEMOCRATIC anti-war candidate?

Where is our DEMOCRATIC anti-war candidate?

Where is our DEMOCRATIC candidate for transparency of the Federal Reserve?

Of course Ron Paul has some screaming fans out there. There is a massive constituency out there that is fucking sick of American empire and exploitation of the common people by the banks. Fully 70 to 80 percent of Americans across party lines want to cut the military budget and curtail the warmongering. Masses of Americans also want transparency in our financial system.

He is the ONLY candidate who is introducing these ideas into the debate at all.

He has no chance of winning the nomination as a result of his libertarian extremism, but he can do some very important things for this debate. He forces the other candidates to talk about these issues. Nobody else is doing that. Certainly Democrats are not doing that.

Where the HELL are the Democrats? Instead of whining that Ron Paul has enthusiastic supporters, they should start looking at why that happens. Yes, there are the hardcore libertarian nuts. But he is also drawing people who are sick and tired of the fact that both parties are propping up corrupt banks and profiting from endless, bloody war.

Of course he has enthusiastic supporters. There is a hunger out there for someone who will call out these scams being perpetrated on the American people. And these issues are so important that I think some people are willing to look past some of the scary libertarianism, just to send a message about that.

As far as I am concerned, Democrats have absolutely no excuse to whine about Ron Paul, when they are doing NOTHING on these issues. For the past two years, Democrats have offered more of the same. We have chosen to settle for just more corporate neocon crap.

:puke:

[white_wolf]

44. Well in 2008 Kucinich was very firmly anti-war, but the democrats wouldn't nominate him.

[woo me with science]

54. Yes, we have to go back to 2008 and to a politician who

was treated as an oddity by his own party and the media. He stood alone in his positions, he looked like a troll, and he believed in aliens, right?

I get tired of the myth that Democrats, nay AMERICANS, will not support a candidate to scale back the wars and make banks accountable. Every single poll shows otherwise. If Democrats in power, respectable Democrats, chose to make these our messages and delivered them in unison, with gravitas, and consistently, the nation would flock to our party.

Instead, our President gives speeches about the importance of cutting the safety net for seniors and the poor.

This party is lost in the wilderness right now. Rather, it is lost on Wall Street. It is going to take principled Democrats to stand up against the corporate neocon elements of our party and show that these messages are respectable, and have been what the American people have been saying they want all along.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2007/11/05/kucinich

[and-justice-for-all]

48. I am sick of all the repuke teabagging fuckers that Jon and Stephen..

have been having on their show. But, on the other hand, Jon seems to be taking them to task (see Mitch Daniels interview) which I find amusing.

[Throd]

56. Said the dude with the Marx avatar,

[philly_bob]

57. I see the appeal of Ron Paul.

Apparently incorruptible. Consistent from year to year. A set of ideas that appeal to the naive -- the Ayn Rand thing, the everybody-else-is-dumb teenage attitude.

His ideas are unworkable, but he's less a corrupted servant of corporate interests than Romney, Perry, the TeaBaggers, Bush.

Plus on some big issues -- war, drugs -- he's right.