NEWS: Fuck Ron Paul

And, by the way, this story is getting a lot of readers from Stormfront - who are not so happy with it. A couple hundred hits so far.

Thanks...

I just tried to look around to see what they were saying, but I felt so dirty even being there I couldn't stay long.

Another quote to chip away at the galloping stupidity of those who insist George Bush is a war monger:

Or this one:

We should totally vote for this Bush guy from 2000, he seems awesome! Look at his quotes!

Couple of gems from the Stormfront forum:

It is a good point. Why should the opinions of suicidal individuals be important? Please discuss.


And this.

Wow, he actually thought that was a "plug." I should have been harsher.

That is the fucking funniest thing I have read in a really long time...bahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Well, I'm pretty sure the people who frequent that site would consider being called "racist" a compliment.

Does anyone have a direct link to this shit? I'm trying to find it, but I'm at a loss...

(but I must say, some of the content I've run across thus far is pure gold, I mean, I knew people thought this way, but to watch themselves try to articulate thoughts...it's kinda amazing... they can't complete a sentence without including "white pride" or "white power"...)

to be honest there's not a "whole lot of articulation going on"....

What I found amusing for the brief time I was there was there was a thread about the NHL Finals. Reading down the topic list, it was "Racist Topic," "Racist Topic," "Racist Topic," "Congratulations, Anaheim Ducks!" I lol'd.

But yeah, a direct link to this topic would be nice; although I'm not sure SG really wants to increase traffic to that place.

Call it morbid curiosity, but yeah, I thought that NHL reference was random, but then again, it is a bunch of white guys...

...classic. I guess nobody ever explained to them the concept of a run-on sentence. That would be "for school" stuff tho'.

Wow, nice work FTR.

I've learned some interesting things reading through this thread.

1) Don't bet on the Royals or the Giants or the Durham Bulls.
2) Many people are confused about Racism and think it involves some kind of active hatred. All it requires is a belief that ones "race" is better than others.
3) Ron Paul's supporters remind me of the early Bush supporters. Yes, yes, he is a douchebag but he is really gonna be great for bi-partisan politics. Yes, yes, he is a douchebag but he voted against the war.
4) I will never be visiting the storm front website. Instead I will watch some more ESPN coverage of the upcoming NBA finals, where superior non white athletes, Manu Ginobli and Zydrunas Ilgaukas will duel it out on the hardwood.
5) White Racists prefer hockey.
6) Many people really don't understand statistics.
7) Many people who have trouble with statistics seem to get emotionally out of whack when their favorite politician is critiqued.

So, I kept reading over and over, on this site and others, that the racist Ron Paul newsletter had been "explained" and the allegations "proven wrong." So, I finally tracked down this alleged source that disputes the racist rants of Paul and what a delightful piece of propoganda piece of shit it is.

Not one time in the entire article is one source named. They are just refered to as "sources." One sourse said, another said, blah blah blah. I was so poorly written by a political operative that it is laughable. Here it is everyone, Ron Paul's followers idea of "proof" that he is not a racist.

sources say that Ron Paul has denied the claims from the other sources and is changing his name to Ziggy.

Why is it when I see right wing groups with the letters CCC in their acronyms (Conservative Christian Coalition, Central Christian Church, Council of Conservative Citizens, etc.), the first think I think of is the KKK? I can't be the only one who sees and thinks this, can I?

You are not the only one.

Oh and...



Kevorkian 2008

I give a fuck...about suicidal people

God damnit I love you, FTR.

Thanks FTR. I think.
I hadn't been exposed to any good Libertarian rants before.
I heard they could be pretty wacky.
Seeing is believing.
Wow

Thanks for this FTR. The past week or so on the politics boards have been an eye opener about Ron Paul. He seems interesting first, but the more you dig, the scarier it gets. Libertarians are fuckin' crazy.

I still haven't heard anybody explain to me how they're going to have this free market yet still somehow dismantle the military-industrial complex or improve our health care system.

Did you actually read anything that he's written about his positions, or just listen to sound bytes?

Do you even understand the 10th Amendment? Much of what Ron votes against isn't because he personally dislikes it, but because he recognizes that our government does not have the Constitutional authority to do much of what it does. For example, he thinks his own views on stem cell research and abortion are irrelevant, since the federal government doesn't have actual authority to either support OR ban them. He doesn't support an abortion ban anymore than legalization.

As our Constitution clearly states, that's for the States to decide.

Fuck, I could go on forever here. Why can none of you jerks put forth a cohesive argument at all? How did you get your jobs here? Who decided to were qualified to write about anything?

I suppose if I didn't understand anything about government or the world around me I could find your writing style entertaining, but the complete lack of viable substance ruins it.

You say he's "not living in the real world" or "doesn't understand what it's like to live in a larger society", yet we do shit that plenty of other countries don't. Why is it our goddamn responsibility to be Robin Hood and rescue every other country from their own inability to run their own nations, especially when it's pretty obvious we're doing a shitty job with ours.

Many of the programs and agencies you mentioned (the EPA for one) HAS NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY. Whether you think it's a good idea is irrelevant. Whether you think it's effective is irrelevant (and if YOU read anything at all, even the government-sponsored investigations and analyses of the EPA, Social Security, Medicare, etc.) then you'd understand that those things aren't helping!

People who want to "save Social Security" or any of our other ridiculous unsustainable entitlement programs are simply trying to save an idea, trying to claim that it's valid and important because the intentions were good and because it makes people FEEL more secure, but it's actually financially harmful to people.

Take a bunch of my money away, I earn no interest off of it, get a small fraction of it back (assuming I get old enough and make enough money during my life -- yes, there's a minimum income level to get full SS benefits, and that wasn't a Republican invention), and when I die any money that I hadn't been paid is kept by the government and not given to my family.

Yeah, awesome program.

At least have the professionalism to gain even a rudimentary understanding of economics and both U.S. and World History before making your ridiculous claims. Ron Paul is advocating ideas that were successful over and over in history, and his view of foreign policy is the reason that we had a country at the start of the 20th Century.

Oh, and your insinuation that he's greedy?

Ron Paul DECLINED to register for a Congressional pension. Do you have any idea what an amazing deal these guys get on retirement? They don't deal with the Social Security system. As a government official you are essentially set for life. He DECLINED ON PRINCIPLE.

As a doctor (an ob-gyn, to be specific), Ron Paul refused to accept Medicare from his patients. What a jerk, right? No, he gave discounted or even FREE services to poor patients.

Yeah, a real asshole.

Get your facts straight, you sensationalist windbag. I understand that getting personally validating internet comments might be more important to you than journalistic ethics, but perhaps that means you should just stick to commenting on pop culture nonsense like Paris Hilton, instead of more serious issues that affect all of us that you seem completely unable or unwilling to understand.

Behold. More corn!

I suppose you would deny the right of the states to cede legislative and regulatory powers to the federal government. Even though the Tenth Amendment allows them to do that.

If you were capable of recognizing a coherent argument, you wouldn't be a Libertarian. That's practically a tautology.

We do not do this. The amount of foreign aid the United States doles out is very small.

An in any event, why shouldn't we? Isn't helping each other a good thing? Isn't that humanity's saving grace? Aren't compassion and charity virtues?

You have a very restrictive understanding of what the Constitution allows. The Constitution allows the government to function regularly, and to create executive and regulatory bodies to assist in its functioning, so long as core civil and political rights are not demonstrably infringed upon in doing so.

Of course, since your ideas of what constitutes a core civil right seem to be things like immunity to taxation, I'm pretty sure that this distinction is not something you'll be able to comprehend.

That's not how Social Security works. It pools resources from everyone to deliver at least a minimum pension to everyone. It's all very communistic, I'll concede ("From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". The difference between you and me is that I'm okay with that.

It's not "your" money. Money, and for that matter property itself, is a legal fiction established by the state (in a democracy, the power of the people collectively) to facilitate the necessary exchange of goods and services. You have no essential, inalienable right to something that the state has to invent. Sorry.

Actually, no I'm not.

I don't know what history you've read that could possibly give you this idea. But I'm guessing it had large print and was very concerned about Radical Reconstruction, the Trilateral Commission, and the Council on Foreign Relations.

The rest of your rant is personal stuff I don't see any purpose to addressing.

Actually, there was no purpose to addressing any of this - I know your mind is made up, and so's mine, so the argument is sterile. But I had some time to kill.

I would like to direct you to this, which has been posted numerous times, but obviously someone as savvy and astute as yourself has no need to understand that: oh yeah...this is a fucking porn site.

BTW- I am far less moved by your obviously biased Libertarian backing of Paul than I am by FTR's article...put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Edit: Are these windbag Libertarians reproducing by budding or some shit? Seriously!

Actually, they reproduce through a special secretion found in the plastic covers that they put on books in the public library, that contains a neurotoxin which turns them into conformist weapons of Darwinian anarchy.

They only seem like clones because all sections of their brains have rotted out except the R-complex and speech centers.