Friday, February 1, 2008

Paultards Attempt to Ruin Huffington Post

A fw days ago, a first time blogger named Heath Calvert wrote an article on the Huffington Post entitled "Why I support Ron Paul." The article follows the same talking points and assumptions that we have come to expect from Ron Paul Democrats: The idea of supporting Ron Paul would have seemed crazy a few months ago, youtube is only source of objective information, the federal reserve and the IRS are bad and should be eliminated, America is uninformed, Ron Paul isn't a "real" republican, the only reason people don't support Ron Paul is because they've been brainwashed by the media, no we're not crazy, and if you would only listen to Ron Paul speak for yourself you would realize that he is the new messiah who's only seen as crazy because he loves the constitution.

The vast majority of commenters there are supportive of Calvert. Does that prove that Ron Paul has more support among liberals than anyone could have anticipated? Does that prove that Ron Paul really could pull a victory off? No. Because it looks like the Paultards are attempting to spam Huffington Post, the same way they spam everything else. Huffington Post proudly displays which sites are linking to their articles, and here's are what they have:

Sites Linking to This Page...
Source Views 5517 647 574 351 159

Hey Paultards, no one is falling for this. If they were, then you wouldn't need to send you legion of 5500 from just to spam them.


John Howard said...

This amazingly stupid writer actually thinks that the definition of "spam" is a huge number of people voicing their agreement. That's called a "grassroots movement".

Spam, on the other hand is when only one writer writes to lots of people.

If this amazingly stupid writer were in agreement with the huge mumber of people, he would no doubt refer to the "voice of the people speaking truth to power" or some such favored liberal rhetoric. But since he disagrees, he smears the voice of these people as "spam".

It is because of this kind of stupidly transparent and hateful rhetoric in oppostion to Ron Paul, that I retain the hope that he will win.

Ron Lawl said...

* Egg and bacon
* Egg, sausage and bacon
* Egg and spam
* Egg, bacon and spam
* Egg, bacon, sausage and spam
* Spam, egg, sausage and spam
* Spam, egg, spam, spam, bacon and spam
* Spam, spam, spam, egg, and spam
* Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans, spam, spam, spam and spam
* Lobster thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce garnished with truffle paté, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam
* Spam, sausage, spam, spam, spam, bacon, spam, tomato and spam

rmg said...

I'm a Ron Paul supporter. I don't think I'm a spammer. I was referred to this and every news/blog I go to by Google News.

Anonymous said...

The author has little knowledge of technology terms or of the internet and combined with the mentality of a 5th grader is about a relevant as dirt.

Let me see if I understand this:

He's saying that someone on Huffington wrote an article in support of Ron Paul. So 5 other sites liked it and thus linked to it. People who support Paul came to read the article from sites that like Ron Paul anyway.

Um this is not spam, my little ignorant friend, it's called, well, support!

Spam would be if the SAME person wrote multiple comments on a blog, but actually the term is ONLY applicable to EMAIL, and refers to ONE person sending out tons of it to multiple parties. Get it?.

I think YOU are the one that is the 'Paultard', simply because when it comes to anything about Ron Paul and the internet, you lack information and demonstrate a retarded, if not naive and decidedly poor understanding of it the two together.

Get it?

Paultard = one who has a poor understanding of the phenomenon known as Ron Paul as well as an understanding of how the internet works.


But you're funny so keep writing this crap so I can have a good belly laugh about it.

MrBold said...

You know when these Paulies write these articles, they always write about sh*t I don't care about.

What the hell do I care what conspiracy theory Ron Paul thinks created the Fed Reserve? I don't understand why these idiots continue to lie and say the Fed Reserve is not apart of the government. This is stuff that's been debunked time and time again.

I could also care less about eliminating the IRS. Taxes aren't my problem or really anybody elses.

The problem is labor is not being rewarded for the gains in productivity we made. Ron Paul doesn't say anything about that.

Ron Paul also doesn't have anything to say about global warming. He probably thinks that's a conspiracy too.

One thing Calvert doesn't bring up that I care about is reproductive rights. Ron Paul is for the government controlling the womb. I'm sure the Paultards monitoring this site will tell us he just wants to move the decision back to the states, but Ron Paul voted for a bill that qualified human life as starting from conception. That's not state rights.

Calvert claims that Ron Paul is curing apathy and it will positively influence the Republican party. I find that hard to believe given that Paul is just a retread of Lyndon LaRouche.

Reading through the comments on this post was also a hoot. Here's a fine piece of Paulie logic:

"Smaller government = smaller corporations = larger amount of personal liberty."-texpatbphu

Yeah tell that to the victims of Enron.

ucdgrad said...

It's amazing how the Paultards have to prove their stupidity, over and over and over.

Or is "stupidity" too mild a term?

Hey paultards, go back to spending your time looking at porn websites.

wilhelm boxer said...

Seriously, if Paul and his supporters never opened their mouths they'd gain credibility. But, well, that would be kind of a tough way to campaign. Like a lot of conservatives, I think many libertarian ideas are attractive, but paul weaves them together in a fantasy.

Anonymous said...

Well...if they never opened their mouths how would they alert others of the New World Order Illuminati death squads!?

LOL, poor paultards.

Cattle Rustler said...


Just writing to you as a supporter. I, and many others, have been fighting these paultards on digg and within their own forums as "undercover" posters, if you will.

These people really can try ones patience.

Thanks for fighting the good fight!

misanthrope2 said...

I posted about Ron Paul on Huffpo for months. I posted about Paul because I did not want him to draw Democratic support. I was twice scrubbed and not for anything I did. Each time, my account was hacked, and posts calling for personal attacks were made in my name. Each time, I wrote Huffpo and asked them to check the address from which the attacks originated. They would not do so. I no longer post there because my purpose was accomplished by the racist newsletters, which I wrote about hundreds of times before the article, and because some geek will keep trying to hack my password until they succeed and get my scrubbed. Huffpo is basically cooperating with the Paultards, maybe for clicks. I did learn that each time I posted, Huffpo received many posts calling for my banning, no matter what subject I was posting on. Imagine that! After Paul drops out, I will go back to posting on Huffpo but they did get rid of me for a while with hacking and Huffpo's help, and with the widespread publication of the newsletters.

Dillird Q THurman said...

Hey, what's up. Apparently this is an entire blog dedicated to denouncing Ron Paul, and his supporters (hereby referred to as "paultards," how mature). Here is the thing, I agree completely with John Howard, although, there is nothing to agree with: this is common knowledge for anyone who has been online for over a year. "Spamming," is done by one, or a team of people who create a bot or something that sends repeatedly, over and over again a single bit of information to one or a list of contacts. What we have in this case, isn't some hacking program (a bot that is) but individuals on their own seeking out information about their candidate and then sharing it with other supporters. Do we really give a shit about numbers, like "hey, let's all SPAM the crap outta this so people will THINK we're a big movement." No, people should think we're a big movement because we are. It's like you people are trying to convince us we're nothing when, we so apparently are a huge movement. Furthermore, it baffles me how people can't see this, I'm a "paultard," and yet you people can't come up with one mature reasonable argument against Ron Paul.

Ron Lawl said...

Well, what can I say, Dillard? You're wrong. Unfortunately, we've seen you Paultards engage in EXACTLY the sort of tactics that you would like to dismiss. When you have hundreds of anonymous Paultards posting to some random math teachers livejournal account because he spoke ill of Ron Paul and trying to post the article to Digg, then yes, that speaks to a concerted effort to try to make yourselves seem bigger than you are.

You guys want to think of yourself like you're some big movement the same way that the LaRoucheys and the scientologists do. It's basic self-delusional behavior.

Oh yeah, and if you don't think that I'm using any reasonable arguments, then feel free to critique them. Right now, all I see is a bunch of Paultard whining, "Oh no, this person has reached a different conclusion from me, therefore, he reasoning must somehow be flawed!" Grow up already.

DQThurman said...

No, I think what would be delusional behavior is to accept your non-reasoning, and believe all the lies you post about Ron Paul. Despite the name calling, and the posts, and the blatant lies you neo-liberals haven't given me one argument that actually forces me to reexamine Ron Paul stances on ANYTHING. For example: how do you think we would spend money on schools? If our wages aren't garnered by the IRS we would have that money; and everyone would invest what they want- instead of this rampant consumerism that only fuels the large corporations and not our economy as a whole. Seriously, I have grown up, do you really think you're all grown up?

Paultard whining? You don't reach conclusions you just rag on people for seemingly no reason and name call.


Ron Lawl said...

Typical Paultard tactic. Dismiss the things you disagree with as lies and smears, without ever going into any actual observations or details of where these supposed lies and smears actually are. It's the same reason why they don't accept the theory of evolution. Why should they, when they know that evolution is a lie, and that the book of Genesis speaks the truth? As for the fact that I haven't given you a reason to re-examine anything, that's probably your failure, not mine. If you could come up with an actual counter argument, that would be one thing. Instead, I see a man with his head so far up his ass that he is completely unable to see anything from anyone else's perspective.

Oh, and the "if we didn't have to spend money on taxes, we would have plenty of money for everything, and no one would be too poor for basic services ever again" argument. How original. Come back when you have any actual statistics backing this up on a large scale, or even some type of game theory based mathematical model that could show that it worked in theory beyond simple bare assertions. You insist that you've grown up, but your entire argument is based on a libertarian fairy tale that's never existed in all of human history.