Ron Paul represents everything that's wrong with the internet. His supporters spam every poll available in a thinly-veiled attempt to suggest he as actual support amongst Americans with jobs. They're the rabid, the unwashed mashes, the dark part of cyberspace you know exists but try to avoid. They spam message boards at every mention of his name in dire hope that comments on YouTube somehow translates into votes. Don't be fooled. The Internet has a disproportional amount of Paulies, but it also has a disproportionate amount of pedophiles as well. Representative of America, it is not. Need more help imagining what a Ron Paul supporter looks like? They were the guy in high school who always said "you know, Hitler was a pretty good leader if you think about it".
Ron Paul has consistently shown around 3% support in nation-wide polls. Given his considerable financial backing, he undoubtedly spends an inconceivable amount more per-percentage point than any other candidate. Why is this? Because his message is wrong and sane people understand this. Ron Paul is your crazy pot-smoking uncle who owns too many guns and is just waiting for the day the government collapses so he and his pool tavern buddies can come out of their dome-shaped bunkers and fight for the wealth the "International Zionist Bankers" have so long denied them.
"Dr." Ron Paul's zealots claim he has the most "pro-constitution" stance of any candidate. He says this with the a straight face as he claims that pretty much every law ever passed is unconstitutional. FDA? Unconstitutional. War on drugs? Unconstitutional. Federal Reserve? Unconstitutional. Since the Supreme Court has vehemently rejected all these claims, a true Ron Paul supporter must believe that they, in their first year as a political science major, have cracked the code of constitutional law that so far has eluded the all the J.D.s that have sat on our nation's highest court.
His views are just plain immature. Claiming that the gold standard will fix the American dollar? Immature. Like trying to solve a famous mathematical problem using only high school algebra, his childish take on a complex situation illustrates he has no understanding of sound monetary policy. Fiat money may be unfair, but is flexible to a fast-paced growing economy you need the ability to quickly adjust the money supply and the gold standard would be an elephant-on-the-back of the economy itself. Not to mention that the US GDP far out values the entire stock of gold in the world. The only way to bring the two in line would be for an apocalyptic depression in the market. But Paulies don't care because the only rich people are the Jewish bankers anyway :rollseyes:.
And let's not forget about his foreign policy. It manages to come across as sounding both like co-dependent victim of domestic abuse making of excuses for their abusive partner and like something out of Mein Kampf. No, don't say Godwin's Law. You're retarded. Ron Paul truly believes that if we just let the Arab world get along with the destruction of Israel than everything will be okay. His "constitutional" backing for this is that several founding fathers were isolationists and, therefore, this is how current day foreign policy should be. "Thomas Jefferson warned us of foreign entanglements!", they cry. No shit. He also was an alcoholic and liked having sex with his slaves on the side. God, he is not. Once again, the whole thing reeks of immaturity.
Want some other crazy tidbits? He supports homeopathy and other "alternative medicines". I wouldn't be surprised if he were a UFO nut as well.
Ron Paul is not wrong or bad in the classical way a politician is wrong or bad. Ron Paul is clinically insane and anyone who supports him has a personality disorder.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
It's "immature" to favor a return to the gold standard? Look who's immature then -- and he sounds like he wants to get rid of the Fed, too!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjMQG3qUFKo
(ffwd to 6:32)
GDP far outweighs the entire stock of gold? Do you know how the GDP is calculated? Anyway, this could just as easily mean that gold is undervalued. And just because the Supreme Court says so, doesn't mean a law is constitutional. The Supreme Court can also rule in an unconstitutional manner. It is true that the Constitution states that only gold and sliver can be used for legal tender. Any law, amendment, or judgement that rules against this is by definition unconstitutional. Some amendments are not amendments, but an attempt to completely reverse what's in the body of the Constitution. That's how some of them can be unconstitutional even if they are passed and tacked onto the Constitution.
Besides, if the people want to do away with the Federal Reserve and paper money, then they have the right to repeal the amendment. It doesn't have to stay there, just like prohibition was repealed.
I understand what you're saying. However, when legions of people more educated on an issue vehemently disagree with everything you say it's evidence that you're probably not right. Ron Paul doesn't think certain things are unconstitutional, he thinks the whole damn kit and kaboodle is.
And there is no amendment for the Federal Reserve, it's in Congress' prescribed powers to print money. The value of that money versus some arbitrary element is just a matter of policy.
As a devoted Huckabee supporter, I also strongly appreciate Ron Paul's fiscal conservatism. Is there anything inconsistent about that? I believe in federalism. I believe in limited government, and so yes, why shouldn't I admire Ron Paul for his principled stand against big government? Having said that, we plan to vote for Huckabee in the MI primary.
The internet has his pedophiles, true. But you are overlooking the fact that using the internet and posting/blogging is a sign of a more-than-average mental capability. I would rather trust an internet user (Spammers as you call them) than a TV-controlled zombie who goes to work, comes back, watches tv, goes to work, etc.
What I am trying to say is, significantly more people who use the internet are capable of critical thinking and makind decisions than people who are not using the internet (out of the ones who have the right to vote)
and speaking about critical thinking, you are making way too many comments that point you out as a biased person, since there is not even the slightest attempt on your part to prove your words. Using words like "wrong" to convince others will merely convince some that you are wrong.
PS: I am from Europe and I'd vote for Paul if I could. He's perhaps America's last chance.
You say one thing good then backstab quickly.
"He's not bad but he's insane."
This is just biased opinion. If you were a Ron Paul supporter then you would be praising his name and spamming around the net as you claim 'all supporters' do.
Opinions are simply that, opinions. Not fact. I could easily call this blog spam since all you do is rant and slander about people who spam about the presidential elections. Who knew that caring and voicing loudly as possible on the only forum left that gives you real free speech on the future of the country was a problem to many like you.
Post a Comment