Follow-Up: Ron's Defense on CNN

This is a follow-up to yesterday's CNN story. A transcript is available as well. For those who want a cliff-notes version, the picture below pretty much sums it up:Remember kids, when the Paulbots proclaim that Ron Paul isn't a racist, contradict them. Instead, reply by saying, "Oh, that's right, he's the anti-racist," and then snicker. The snickering is what makes it funny. Oh, and if Ron Paul doesn't see people in groups, then why does his campaign ads promise to end visas for students from "terrorist nations," as though being born in the wrong country somehow makes you a terrorist? The people at Stormfront enjoy that ad so much that it shows up on every forum post on their site. But the ad isn't racist. It's anti-racist.

Racist: I hate the blacks, and I would like to own them as slaves.
Anti-Racist: I love the blacks, and I would like to own them as slaves.

Our FAQ sheet regarding the newsletter has been updated once again. A common Paulbot denial is that the "ghostwriter" had already been fired. But Ron Paul claims that he never knew about the newsletter, and never knew the name of the writer, so his own story would make that impossible. In related news, it turns out that the subscription manager of Ron Paul's newsletter is now the Texas Field Coordinator.

Dear Paultards: Stop leaving comments about how libertarians really are infallible, and how they really can't be racist. Those types of arguments aren't going to win people over. It's not only a non-sequitor, but it's also a no-true-Scotsman fallacy. You can't advocate a policy of "absolute freedom, except when you use your freedom to be racist, which is unacceptable." Doesn't work like that. Especially after you vote for the Civil Rights Act because it infringes on your freedom to discriminate.

Finally, I once again urge people to write into the Martin Luther King Estate, and ask them if they approve of Ron Paul's use of Martin Luther King's image to make money. Ask them if they approve of or endorse Ron Paul's platform on addressing racism, or the fact that he voted against Martin Luther King Day.

Fans of the Vagina Doctor hope to someday talk to an actual girl

Ever wonder what Paultards do when they're not being such Paultards? Have you ever wondered how their social skills of spamming and trolling might translate in the real world? Libby Copeland of the Washington Post attempts to investigate, in her shocking expose, "To Be Young And in Love With Ron Paul."

During spare moments, which are rare, the Paul boys watch guy movies such as "Transformers" and wish there were more girls around.

Oh well, says Adam Kirschner, 23, of Ozark Christian College, leaning against a wall in the campaign office. "We didn't come here for the chicks."

"Speak for yourself," says Eddie Siegel, 18.

You tell them, Eddie. Adam Kirschner may not be aware of this, but I've personally managed to pick up many a chicks in the bars simply by telling them to google Ron Paul. As soon as they hear about his plans to return the gold standard, they become putty in my arms.

We always wondered what the deal was with the backwards "love" in "revolution." My hunch is that it's a Paultard attempt at subliminal seduction. That's just creepy, guys. Really, really creepy.

Ron Paul appears on "Meet the Press"

The liberal media conspires makes another strike against Ron Paul. This time, they've chosen to silence him by giving only one episode of "Meet the Press" rather than an entire month. The video is available online, as well as a transcript for people who don't feel like sitting through the entire interview.

In a nutshell: Ron Paul continues to advocate his magical taxation system without addressing any of the criticisms. Pork barrel libertarianism isn't hypocritical if your constituents really, really want them. You're not a hypocrite if you demand mandatory term limits to thwart the wills of voters and politicians, as long as you don't encourage voluntary term limits where you choose to resign on your own. The civil war was an evil plot by Lincoln to destroy the original intent of the public. Ron Paul doesn't believe in ghostwriters when Sinclair Lewis does it.

Missing from the interview are any news stories regarding Ron Paul's recent scandals involving his connections to white supremacists.

Not surprisingly, the Ron Paul martyrs of the internet are already on youtube crying persecution over the fact that there are journalists who are actually willing to take Ron Paul seriously enough to ask him some serious questions, rather than simply taking Ron Paul at his word.

Washington Post does Fact Checking on Ron Paul's IRS Policy

One of the main reasons that people support Ron Paul is because of his promises to cut taxes. "We could completely eliminate that IRS," they promise, "We just need to go back to 2000 spending levels." A bold claim. An appealing claim. But is it true? Michael Dobbs of the Washington Post does the fact checking, and gives Four Pinocchios for Ron Paul:

This seemed too good to be true, and it was. Without the revenues from individual income tax, the federal budget would shrink to the size it was in the early 1990s, not the year 2000. The discretionary share of the federal budget--the money the government spends on defense, the federal bureaucracy, the environment, education, and health--would dwindle to zero. All remaining federal revenues would be earmarked for mandatory entitlement spending such as social security--which Paul has said he would not touch--and interest on debt.

Remember, kids, there's no such thing as a free lunch.