Stickerbombs and Conspiracy Theories

In light of their recent failures as a political movement, the Paultards have have recently introduced their latest strategy for bringing a swift and sudden victory for the Doctor: The Ron Paul sticker bomb. Because I guess that this is Ron Paul's greatest hurdle, the fact that he doesn't have enough vandalism going on under his name. Because obviously, all those past efforts to bumper sticker the city have worked out really, really well. I know the stock response, "It's not about Ron Paul, it's about the movement." So just out of curiosity, what happens to this sticker when you take Ron Paul out of the equation?

Meanwhile, the Ron Paul Tumblelog finds one DailyPaul poster asking the other DailyPaul posters to cut down on the conspiracy theories. It doesn't go over very well.

And finally, a few notes to all of the anonymous RonPaulogists who like to comment on this site:

1. When I call you a Paultard, it's not so you guys can start whining about how I hurt your feelings , and how persecuted you are, and how you supposedly have a 180-point internet IQ. No, when I call you a Paultard, it's a challenge, to see if you can prove me wrong by adding a rational argument. For a group of wanna-be revolutionaries, you guys seem to have an incredibly thin spine.
   
2. BlogSpot shows me your comments, but it doesn't say which post the comment is responding to. So the only way I know what you're responding to is if your comment somehow makes it clear to me. Here's the deal: If you comment doesn't make it clear to me, then chances are, you aren't responding to any post in particular. And if you aren't responding to any post in particular, then chances are that you aren't responding to any argument in particular. And if you aren't responding to a particular argument, then it's extremely difficult for you to find the flaws of that argument, much less develop an argument of your own. In other words, if it isn't clear what you comment is responding to, then your comment is probably garbage, and not worth publishing. Common examples are the people who accuse me of spreading lies and smears, but who never actually explain why I'm using them.
   
3. I've been arguing with libertarians for years and Paultards for months, and honestly, most of your arguments are pretty derivative. Chances are that if you're repeating something that you heard from someone else, then I've heard it as well, and I've already refuted it. If you want to impress me, then try to think on your own for a change. I know that's a lot to ask, from a group that supposedly prides itself for its individuality, but please bear with me.

That's all for now. Peace out.

Ron Paul and the "Reo-Cons"

Editors Note: The following article comes from a site visitor named John, and not by the creator of this blog:

Gary North is a former congressional aid for Ron Paul, but North is also a major figure in Christian Reconstructionism. When most people think of right-wing Christianity they will often assume that the lunatics are Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell. Which is correct, but one must not also forget the Reo-Cons like Gary North:

“when people curse their parents, it unquestionably is a capital crime”-Gary North

“The integrity of the family must be maintained by the threat of death”

“....And he the blasphemeth the name of the Lord,he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him” (source)

The above statements are pretty bad ass, and sounds like something Osama Bin Laden would advocate for. So then why would someone like Ron Paul have Gary North be a member of his staff? Maybe its because they both want to return to the gold standard,and return to a LewRockwellian sized government. I have pretty good hunch though Ron Paul is up to something else, and i think it rhymes with “newsletter”.

In Angry White Man, James Kirchick not only brings up the newsletter,but he also brings up Gary North,and Christian Reconstructionism. Kirchich also points out that Ron Paul and Gary North are pretty close. For example Ron Paul stated in a letter “Perhaps you already read in Gary North's Remnat Review about my exposes of government abuse.” Does Ron Paul read Christian Reconstructionism literature,and share similar views? Of course. Just look at Ron Paul's rants at LewRockwell.com. In one The Moral Promise of Freedom, Ron Paul defends David Koresh, and refers to him as the “groups spiritual leader." Paul continues to defend Koresh's cult, and portrays them as peace loving hippies. Koresh was a child molester, and brainwashed those “handmaidens of the lord.” The fact that Ron Paul would defend Koresh is beyond me. Actually its not, and it just shows how Ron Paul thinks property rights should trump individual rights. So not only does Paul think Koresh is the man,but he also sounds just as nuts as Gary North.

If you still think Ron Paul is America's last hope, and are still feeding on his fear mongering Then you should probably start building your bomb shelter. If you need help with the construction of this, or are unsure of what to do I have a solution. Pick up the phone and contact Gary North. I am sure he still knows how to build the ultimate pillow fort, after all he did predict the end of the world to happen during Y2K. If you have ever talked to a Ron Paul supporter you to may realize they fear the end is near.

Gary North and Ron Paul arent the only one's who are caught in the web of Christian Reconstructionism. In fact they are perhaps the one's who are trying to do there best to create a Christian Republic. The Reo-Cons, and Ron Paul have a very similar agenda,and it is perhaps the most illogical one on capital hill. Property rights would re-place individual rights,and the state would have the right enforce sodomy laws. Reo-Cons would also treat women like second class citizens. This is no surprise since Ron Paul's book freedom under siege implies that women should cease with sexual harassment suits,and instead find another job.

Ron Paul can play senile about the newsletter,and fool a few paultards,but he isn't going to fool most when it comes to We The People Act. If this bill was actually passed then it would be pretty easy for states to enforce current sodomy laws. It would also make it impossible for the supreme court to rule such violations as unconstitutional. This comes as no surprise since Ron Paul has met with the National Reform Association,and is perhaps a strong believer in there libertarian policy's. As of yet I know they have only met once,and the fact there first trip to capital hill involved Ron Paul is a little suspicious. This meeting occurred on march first, and during the year 2001, one year after Y2K.

The Paultards can talk all they want about Ron Paul,or even tell me to Google him. They can talk about change,and even loose change. When it comes down to it though they will still have to dig through his records just like I have. Once the paultards actually dig through his record they may do one of two things. Paultards will either continue to defend him and David Koresh,or actually do some research. Its pretty simple to see now why an informed opinion would not rally behind Ron Paul.

Ron Paul Drinks Fiji Water

(h/t to the Ron Paul Tumblelog)

Internal Paultard Chaos Erupts Over Possible Astronaut Endorsement

The Paultards are continuing their tactic of reading endorsements into situations where no endorsement exists. From Wonkette:

In one of the better recent threads at Ron Paul Forums yesterday, someone floated the idea of courting Neil Armstrong’s support based on a blurb from the famous astronaut’s Wikipedia page: “The first man to walk on the Moon was also approached by political parties from both ends of the spectrum. Unlike former astronauts and United States Senators John Glenn and Harrison Schmitt, Armstrong has turned down all offers.” Later in the thread however, Armstrong’s ties with the CORPORATES are revealed — he’s a Freemason and a Skull & Bonesman, it seems, and therefore made up the moon landing!

And they wonder why people accuse them of being crazy.

Followup on Jennifer Call

A few days ago, we did a story on how Paultards were harassing an election worker named Jennifer Call, over their recent bout with soreloseritis. Now, it looks like the Paultards have an official explanation for their behavior: It's a conspiracy!

David805
Member

Some reality's of life.

1. Yes.. SOME of our ... Supporters are nuts ..

2. Some of the people here are not supporters of Ron Paul but claim they are.

3. The possibility that the people who called/sent email's /etc to this woman threating her and calling her names. Are actually not Ron paul supporters but GOP or even Democrat's who are trying to soil Ron Paul's name is quite high.

4. The recount will be done.. UNTIL the recount is done and a investigation is done NO ONE knows exactly all the facts. So i Caution anyone from causing hysteria before there is some evidence to prove without a doubt that fraud took place.

5. Those people who did harass this poor woman do not support Ron Paul.. If they did they would never have done what they did.

6. Until Proof Beyond a shadow of a doubt is presented we can not rationaly form a INFORMED opinion about this issue.

Ah, the "libertarians are infallible and anything that says otherwise must therefore be wrong" fallacy. After all, Paultards would never amount to harassing people, right?

Edit: Reading through that thread, the most annoying thing about it are the Paultards who insist that "Saying that it was an honest mistake is not enough!", as though they've never made a mistake before in their entire lives. Honest mistakes happen. This was a mistake of minor consequence. The only thing you can do is correct your mistakes when they're pointed out to you, which she did. Which is a lot more than I can say for Ron Paul. What's done is done. What more do you want from her? At this point, the Paultards are just upset over their recent defeats, and they're just looking for someone to vent their frustrations on.

Paultards on the Attack

Some of you may have heard about the conspiracy theories involving "voter fraud" in New Hampshire. Basically, an election worker makes a simple mistake, and the Paultards freak out. It's amazing how they can easily forgive Ron Paul for decades of racist newsletter articles, but one volunteer worker makes an inconsequential mistake about Ron Paul, and suddenly there's hell to pay. The Concord Monitor reports the story:

The assault picked up after lunch. Paul supporters phoning Call claimed to be from the media. Others just yelled, saying she had committed treason, fraud. One person said she should be shot. She received as many as 40 calls that day.

"One person said he was on a nationally syndicated radio station," Call said, "and he has given out my phone number and they need to call the town of Sutton to find out why there's voter fraud."

The voices came from everywhere. California. Ohio. Florida. Michigan. Very few were from New Hampshire.

A man from Texas e-mailed that he was "contacting, by certified mail, the Attorney General of New Hampshire . . . and requesting a complete investigation and prosecution of any and all parties involved."

A police dispatcher in New London said yesterday she'd received inquiries about the clerk's office phone.

Call got a handful of calls that night at home, refusing to pick up whenever an out-of-state number appeared on her screen.

Although some of the posters at ronpaulforums are apologetic, others are not:

this really only begs one question, If Jennifer Call didn't write the wrong vote down, then:
WHO WROTE DOWN THE WRONG VOTE?

gimmie a name
Until she fesses up who forged the wrong tally for Paul, then she deserves every single little damn bit of hell she receives. Give her Hell till she Confesses who it was that forged the wrong tally. Dont dare let her weasel out with a plea for pity!

And later...

what kinda idiots do they have running the voting there if they cant properly record a number from one peice of paper to another. i mean a 7 year old could do that. = clearly indicates fraud, and they thought they could slide with it. Look to the person that Actually wrote the Zero vote down for Paul. THAT guy is the criminal here.

Irony, thy name is Ron Paul.

Lighter News: The Conscience of a Ron Paul Supporter

This one comes from Sultan Knish, who writes the following:

Ever wonder what goes on inside the head of a Ron Paul supporter who isn't a giant racist and actually has to rationalize supporting a blatantly lying candidate? Here you can have a look at how a Ron Paul supporters off the Ron Paul forums reacts to the revelations about the newsletters, tries to cope with it and adopts a "party line" which he doesn't really believe himself.

It's an instructive look not only inside the Ron Paul campaign but inside a mind warped by propaganda and finding no choice but to "learn to love big brother" in the form of Ron Paul.

It's a story told in screenshots of how the human mind adapts to believing in lies. Since it's graphic intensive, it's rendered in a separate screen.

This article needs to be seen to be believed. We all knew that the Paultards were delusional freaks who would bend over backwards to defend Ron Paul, but rarely do we see one who is willing to chronicle his thought process, out loud, from beginning to end. The next time you're dealing with a particularly stubborn Paultard, I recommend that you point them to this article, so that everyone can have a good laugh at DaronWestbrooke's expense.

Keli Ata, a commenter at Sultan's blog, writes the following:

I'm pretty sure there's a psychological term for when one person's ego becomes so totally dependent upon a cult figure that a failure of one is the failure of the other. Daron isn't only defending Ron Paul--he's also defending himself