November 13, 2007
This is war!

Connoisseurs of the blogosphere are well acquainted with the mayhem caused by supporters of Ron Paul in assorted comment threads. While some journalists have publicly noted the spam they receive from such folk, this writer has heretofore avoided such mayhem in his personal email. For good or for ill though, comment threads at Sound Politics have not escaped the watchful eye of of Paul's no-doubt sexually frustrated supporters. Indeed, who among us has not seen a comment thread bombarded or a Internet poll hijacked by Ron Paul's Internet legions?

Ah, but there is hope. The left-of-center satirists at Wonkette have proposed an unholy alliance with RedState:

We may not like your internets, and you may not like ours, but we must work together to destroy a mutual enemy -- illegal alien spambots, a.k.a. Paultards.

Joyously, RedState is gleefully on board. If ever there was a cause to unite the left and right wings of the blogosphere, this is it. I will join this fight if I can just figure out where in the hell to sign up.

Godspeed to us all to vanquish this scourge.*

* = such descriptions do exclude polite and thoughtful Ron Paul supporters such as Bruce Guthrie. Alas, Paul commenters like him are few and far between. Now, back to the battle plans.

Posted by Eric Earling at November 13, 2007 07:51 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Risking cyborg terror by calling the Paulbots "sexually frustrated," Eric? You're a braver man than I am.

Posted by: Benjamin Johnstone-Anderson on November 13, 2007 08:03 PM
2. As one who supports Ron Paul, it infuriates me that I've started receiving spam email from bots advertising Ron Paul. I suppose we'll eventually get spam supporting the rest of the candidates as well, but these people only hurt the campaign.

It'd be neat to see official Ron Paul sites join in this 'war' to help eliminate the spambots.

Posted by: japerry on November 13, 2007 08:29 PM
3. on noes!

This just in: nobody cares

When RedState or Wonkette can get their Alexa ratings out of the toilet, and once again beat RonPaulForums in traffic, then maybe they'll be on to something. Until then, they can keep digging the nice hole they've started for themselves.

Besides, sites like RedState will be entirely irrelevant once Paul starts cleaning house in the Primaries.

Posted by: Chris on November 13, 2007 08:53 PM
4. So, so lame.

Posted by: matt on November 13, 2007 09:01 PM
5. Case in point:

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/ronpaulforums.com/ronpaulforums.com?h=300&h=400&range=1m&site0=ronpaulforums.com&site1=redstate.com&site2=wonkette.com&site3=&site4=&size=Medium&w=610&w=700&y=r&z=3&z=3

Posted by: Chris on November 13, 2007 09:03 PM
6. We are on the Internet all of the time, impossible to be sexually frustrated.

Posted by: Curtis on November 13, 2007 09:10 PM
7. I'm a Ron Paul supporter who recently signed up on RedState. Instead of supporting Paul on there, I just criticize every other presidential candidate. I suggest all Paul fans sign on Red State to do the same and any other site that bans Paul supporters. It will drive them crazy. So, go under cover and have fun.

Posted by: Benson on November 13, 2007 09:10 PM
8. I'm guessing your war on Ronbots (or whatever derogatory term you wish to call them this week) will be as successful as the war on terror, the war on drugs or the war on [insert enemy here]. One thing for sure this article will have a high viewer ship just by dropping Ron Paul's name. If there wasn't so much political apathy in this country then maybe there would be other candidates name to the masses. Alas there is a disease called political apathidice in which the only cure is the message of freedom, which can only be administered by Ron Paul and his belief in the constitution. Oh and since I’m probably a spam bot… Stupid neo-con! [Insert inappropriate language]… [Call you brainwashed or something along those lines]... [Say how every who doesn’t support Ron Paul is screwing America] et cetera… you know the rest.

Posted by: Paul Klavins on November 13, 2007 09:20 PM
9. What would Dick Cheney say to the author, oh yeah...
GO FUCK YOUR SELF

Seacrest OUT

Posted by: robert on November 13, 2007 09:35 PM
10. Comrade Eric Earling wrote:

"If ever there was a cause to unite the left and right wings of the blogosphere, this is it.

I will join this fight if I can just figure out where in the hell to sign up.

Godspeed to us all to vanquish this scourge.*"

* = the US Constitution!

Eric you can "sign up" for the fight in Beijing, Cuba, Moscow...

Posted by: Phil Blanks on November 13, 2007 09:35 PM
11. Eric,

Instead of vainly trying to ban the supporters of Ron Paul, just join us! (because, as you know, resistance is futile). You'll be a lot less stressed, have a lot more fun, and do this country a whole lot more good.

Everyone is welcome aboard the USS Liberty, with Captain Ron Paul at the helm. And back to the bilge, you stinking neocons!

Posted by: Alan on November 13, 2007 09:38 PM
12. This is what you call guerrilla marketing for your own pathetic gain. You purposely post ignorance to try to get a rise out of Ron Paul supporters, knowing full well you will now get more hits to your site. This will happen now, because I, like many other people right now are finding out about Ron Paul, searching sites and watching this momentum build. Its a tidal wave and its going to move from the internet to the mainstream media pretty soon.
Go Ron Paul!!
Ron Paul 2008!

Posted by: THIS IS SPARTA! on November 13, 2007 09:40 PM
13. If anyone is on Facebook, they can join a group for people who want an a loney named Paul to be president but are unsatisfied with Ron.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7458577196

Posted by: etowncoug on November 13, 2007 09:43 PM
14. Hey, remember when wonkette used to be funny?

Neither do I.

I don't read Wredstate, and I don't read Wankette anymore.

I propose the following rule for us Paulunteers:

When you do a google search and see a negative piece on Ron Paul, only go there and comment if the article is 1 hour old or less. Politely rebutt the argument, and then leave.

If the article is more than 1 hour old, then don't even load the page.

Stop rewarding the haterz.

Posted by: Kevin Houston on November 13, 2007 09:49 PM
15. lol, RonPaul(tm)is one of the bigger internet jokes at the moment. The fact that his supporters don't get this, and still post weird cultish replies to any post about him, just makes it all the better. The loons, crazies, and RonPaul are what make primary season the great thing it is. It will be sad in a couple months when were left with Clinton and Guillani(or two other professional boring grownups) for the better part of a year.

Posted by: Giffy on November 13, 2007 09:58 PM
16. Giffy,

You are a fucking idiot if you really beleive this is an Internet joke...I am one of those "sexually frustrated" people that keeps the Internet running so idiots like you can send email fowards of cute kitten pictures. I think, therefore, if anyone would be the one to spot a new web cliche before you, it would be me. RP is for real, 100% hardcore in your face REALITY.

The real joke will be seeing all of you disapear into insignificance after http://www.teaparty07.com makes history and just further proves how pathetic and wrong your opinions are.

So chuckle away, you have about a month.

Posted by: Rich on November 13, 2007 10:20 PM
17. Eric: there is something far more dangerous to fear from Ron Paul supporters than this.

We have caucuses coming up in February, you know.

Posted by: pudge on November 13, 2007 10:44 PM
18. "So chuckle away," lulz, will do my friend... and thanks for making my point for me.

Posted by: giffy on November 13, 2007 10:48 PM
19. Eric, thanks for mentioning Ron Paul! :)
And thanks for the nice compliment.
I will continue to try to keep it rational and positive!
It is a pleasure to increase your hits and your comment counts! :)

Rich @ 16: chill buddy. You make us look bad. Not as bad as the truthers and NWO loons, but still, take a page from Ron Paul's book. He never responds to attacks or low blows by stooping to the level of his attackers. He keeps in positive and on message. Liberty is a beautiful and positive thing. Stick to that and we will make more friends for our cause. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar! :)

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 13, 2007 11:24 PM
20. Pudge said this:

"Eric: there is something far more dangerous to fear from Ron Paul supporters than this.

We have caucuses coming up in February, you know."

You don't know how correct you are and you really should be worried.

Lucianne.com posted the following:

"Wednesday, November 14, 2007

The Ron Paul Campaign and its
Neo-Nazi Supporters
American Thinker, by Andrew Walden Original Article
Posted By: thudlike - 11/14/2007 1:09:57 AM Post Reply
When some in a crowd of anti-war activists meeting at Democrat National Committee HQ in June, 2005 suggested Israel was behind the 9-11 attacks, DNC Chair Howard Dean was quick to get behind the microphones and denounce them saying: "such statements are nothing but vile, anti-Semitic rhetoric." When KKK leader David Duke switched parties to run for Louisiana governor as a Republican in 1991, then-President George H W Bush responded sharply,"

This is the link to the article:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html


Looks like the Paulistas are setting up for a David Duke like run at your caucuses. Best wishes folks, you'll need it. If the Deadheads I saw at Westlake on Saturday are any indication, you will have to use the same tactics the Louisiana pubbies used to get their party back from Duke.

Posted by: WVH on November 13, 2007 11:37 PM
21. I read Michael Medved, I find him thoughtful, this is a quote from the American Spector article with the link in the above post:

"On October 26 nationally syndicated radio talk show host Michael Medved posted an "Open Letter to Rep. Ron Paul" on TownHall.com. It reads:

Dear Congressman Paul:


Your Presidential campaign has drawn the enthusiastic support of an imposing collection of Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists, Holocaust Deniers, 9/11 "Truthers" and other paranoid and discredited conspiracists.

Do you welcome- or repudiate - the support of such factions?

More specifically, your columns have been featured for several years in the American Free Press -a publication of the nation's leading Holocaust Denier and anti-Semitic agitator, Willis Carto. His book club even recommends works that glorify the Nazi SS, and glowingly describe the "comforts and amenities" provided for inmates of Auschwitz.

Have your columns appeared in the American Free Press with your knowledge and approval?

As a Presidential candidate, will you now disassociate yourself, clearly and publicly, from the poisonous propaganda promoted in such publications?

As a guest on my syndicated radio show, you answered my questions directly and fearlessly.
Will you now answer these pressing questions, and eliminate all associations between your campaign and some of the most loathsome fringe groups in American society?

Along with my listeners (and many of your own supporters), I eagerly await your response.

Respectfully, Michael Medved
Medved has received no official response from the Paul campaign.

There is more. The Texas-based Lone Star Times October 25 publicly requested a response to questions about whether the Paul campaign would repudiate and reject a $500 donation from white supremacist Stormfront.org founder Don Black and end the Stormfront website fundraising for Paul. The Times article lit up the conservative blogosphere for the next week. Paul supporters packed internet comment boards alternately denouncing or excusing the charges. Most politicians are quick to distance themselves from such disreputable donations when they are discovered. Not Paul.

Daniel Siederaski of the Jewish Telegraph Agency has been trying to get an interview with Paul, calling him repeatedly but not receiving any return calls, and writes the Texas Congressman "...will take money from Nazis. But he won't take telephone calls from Jews."

Posted by: WVH on November 13, 2007 11:42 PM
22. Comments 20 and 21 are exactly the kinds of attacks that Ron Paul supporters should ignore. don't rise to the bait.

And WVH wore out his welcome with me about a week ago. He used ad hominem arguments and called me names too many times. I have announced that I would no longer respond to his posts.

We Ron Paul supporters don't have to sink to this level.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 14, 2007 12:51 AM
23. I can just imagine little Eric Earling, as kid wearing his Flock of Seagulls t-shirt poking at a hornets nest with a stick...

Posted by: Don Ward on November 14, 2007 05:18 AM
24. LOL. Imagine a world where Ron Paul makes sense. Then imagine just how much medication that would take.

Posted by: steve miller on November 14, 2007 06:29 AM
25. Ron Paul supporters are starting to sound like Lyndon LaRouche supporters (or Ross Perot for that matter).

Posted by: William on November 14, 2007 07:32 AM
26. Giffy, you are righton. Self-delusion.

Eric, need a bunch of hits?

Posted by: swatter on November 14, 2007 07:38 AM
27. We Ron Paul supporters don't have to sink to this level.

As demonstrated by the comments they make here and elsewhere, most Ron Paul supporters would have to rise from submarine crushing depths to get to that level.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega on November 14, 2007 07:46 AM
28. A correction - "we Ron Paul supporters" should read "we FEW Ron Paul supporters."

Posted by: steve miller on November 14, 2007 08:16 AM
29. Bruce Gutherie said:

"And WVH wore out his welcome with me about a week ago. He used ad hominem arguments and called me names too many times. I have announced that I would no longer respond to his posts.

We Ron Paul supporters don't have to sink to this level."

First, as I have said many times, I am a woman.

Second, it was longer than a week ago I wore out my welcome with Bruce G. He e-mailed me privately after I made specific inquires about his faith position on the subject of abortion. He did not want to disclose much about it. My theory is Bruce G. is of a particular faith hertitage and is running as fast as he can from that hertitage.
The particular ad hominum attack was that I called Bruce G a Dickinsonian weasel and still do. As I explained to him in the private e-mail response, I feel at liberty to disclose my side of the conversation, I called him a Dickinsonian weasel because his contempt for his fellow traveler along life's highway is breathtaking. He e-mailed back that he wouldn't respond to my attacks and would never respond to be personally again. I e-mailed back that that response was horsepucky.

Finally, Bruce G and his merry little band of bigots haven't got the balls to respond to Medved because they can't. They support an anti-Semite and bigot and have no response to his questions.

I get in the sandbox and play with the guys and I don't whine. Bruce G., you want some cheese with your whine, wimp? You Paulie's supporting a guy that is afraid to argue with a woman?

Posted by: WVH on November 14, 2007 09:20 AM
30. WVH: Ron Paul is not a racist or truther, and neither are the overwhelming majority of his supporters. His racist supporters are not something to worry about, especially in Washington. I know there are some racists in this state, but not enough to come close to overtaking the party.

If I were Ron Paul, I would embrace any embracing of my ideas, and take the opportunity to point out how some misapply my ideas. For example, anyone who believes in oppressing any group because of race, religion, or creed obviously doesn't understand Paul's ideas about liberty and lack of government coercion.

The real danger is not from Ron Paul supporters themselves, who are mostly great people, just like all other groups I've encountered who want to participate in the political process. It's simply that I dislike the idea of a faction of people who are not participating in the party, who have not been here all along, helping to improve it and grow it, trying to take it over, and flood the caucus with a minority viewpoint just because it's the only way that minority viewpoint can get anywhere.

But I wouldn't do anything to stop them, besides trying to get out all supporters and activists as well (and indeed, I encourage all Paul supporters to show up too!): if the Paulites do win the day in the caucuses, then they deserve to control the party, because obviously there wasn't enough interest from others. The indolent become slaves to the active. I am just saying, if you do care about the party and don't want this sort of thing to happen, get involved. If you wake up the day after not having gone to the caucuses and Ron Paul controls the state's conventions, you have nothing to complain about it.

WVH, this includes you, too. The caucuses are not just for party people.

Posted by: pudge on November 14, 2007 09:27 AM
31. Pudge

As I have said before, like it or not if RP does not step away and DE-nounce them. The Dem's will beat him to a pulp in the media.
He has no chance to become prez with this around his neck.. AND yes there is much info out there on RP writings.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 14, 2007 09:47 AM
32. Hello Pudge,

I think that in any movement, a lot of people get swept along with the current. As Medved pointedly asked, why doesn't Paul disavow the more radical elements as other leaders have done? Leaders need to lead, if the philosophy of Hitler and Duke are not part of the Paul agenda, then say so.

I suppose on a theorical level about your party being invaded by Paul people you are correct. I suppose on a theoretical level the Nazi taking over Germany fits some theory. The practical effect of the Nazis taking over Germany was awful. Eventually, the Louisana republicans wrested control from the Duke supporters. I suppose if Paul takes over here, that would be a wake-up call, but the practical effect would be to cement control for the dems for the next 20-30 years as people are repulsed by the Paul people and vote for the crook(s).

You are absolutely correct about people like me who will stay home, I am not a party person for either party. I only volunteer and support school issues, but you are correct in calling me on it. :-)

Posted by: WVH on November 14, 2007 09:53 AM
33. Bring it on. Being a smaller blog, I've only seen a few instances of Propaulian spam, but spam it is and spam has been canned, and any further canning is welcome by me.

Posted by: Matthew on November 14, 2007 11:00 AM
34. "Paul's no-doubt sexually frustrated supporters"

Spit take!!!!


Thanks Eric.

Posted by: pbj on November 14, 2007 11:03 AM
35. Hearing all the Paultards come out of the woodwork and tell us we will be sorry when the great Paul comes to power reminds me of Linus waiting for the Great Pumpkin.

Posted by: pbj on November 14, 2007 11:15 AM
36. Bruce G: Sorry, but WVH is spot on. Unless Ron Paul agrees with the racist, extreme factions that so fevervently support him, he should publicly and loudly denounce them and their views. And if you post here, you should not be afraid/decline to engage WVH or anyone else here on this forum, rather than a private, sneak e-mail that no one else sees. For the most part, the Paulistas are so weird, disconnected, and incoherent in their comments, they're kinda funny!

Posted by: katomar on November 14, 2007 12:28 PM
37. Since when did supporting the only candidate with any sense become cause for being called names by someone I can only think of as a moron?

Posted by: John Galt on November 14, 2007 12:53 PM
38. I agree with what Pudge wrote @30.
I, personallly can't get involved in the Republican Party, because I am now serving as Vice Chair of the WA State Libertarian Party. Were this not true, I am still not sure I could bring myself to joining the Republican Party. There are as many things alienating me from the R's as from the D's. I don't think I could stomache either one. But I could bring myself to vote for him if he gets the R nomination because I feel I would be voting for the individual and not his party.

But if Ron Paul wins the WA caucus, it will be because he generated more support in the state. He'll deserve the win, as pudge points out above.

Katomar @ 36, I know these accusations that Ron Paul is a Nazi are just smear tactics, and I do not percieve them to be a threat. They are the desperate tactics that are used when there is no rational attack available. Ron Paul is not racist or sexist and neither am I. He defends liberty and the Constitution and equal protection under the law and so do I.

There are a few areas where I disagree with Ron Paul. For instance, he tends to side with the religious special interests on bluring the line between church and state. He doesn't have a problem with prayer in government schools or Christmas displays on government property. He is a religious person and I am an atheist. His faith is a down-side for me.

Also, he is pro-life, and I think that abortion should be legal in the first four or five months of pregnancy, and in the case of serious risk to the life of the mother. But his position on eliminating Roe vs. Wade by getting the federal government out of abortion and leaving it to the states would as likely yield my favored position as his.

Ron Paul is also a little more anti-immigrant than I am. He voted for the border fence bill, and seems to want to defend the rule of law against illegal immigrants. I'm not quite sure if he would deport them, but I am much more pro-immigration than he is. I think we should eliminate welfare to non-citizens, (as Ron Paul does) but allow in all peaceful people who just want to come here to work.

I don't advocate eliminating the CIA, but I would love to eliminate the IRS and departments of commerce and education, among others.

But taken as a whole, Ron Paul defends my values much better than the other candidates in the race. I am proud to lend him my support, and unlike many, I am lending my real name, in public, in this forum and others, to his cause.

I am not afraid.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 14, 2007 01:14 PM
39. Bruce... check on this stuff. RP has written much in his years and this race problem has suck with him..

I'm not here to changes what you believe.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 14, 2007 02:19 PM
40. Let’s see, I have been called a cyber terrorist, RonBot, Paultard, a Joke and sexually frustrated. I learned along time ago not to respond to name calling, it does not help. People need to be able to make their own decisions. So let’s take a look at what the “normal” political people think is business as usual.

Business as usual:

Total public debt in this country at $9 Trillion, nice present to pass on to our children and grandchildren. It is kind of like being told when you turn 18, that you owe $40,000, because you parents took an around the world vacation, but what the hell, as long as the band plays on, right?

Annual Interest payments of $400 Billion, every year (and climbing), that is 2x the annual cost of the war in Iraq.

An economy that is dependent on the US dollar continuing to be the international safe haven for wealth. Have you looked at the relationship between the US $ and the EURO lately? As the EURO continues to become more popular, who are we going to borrow that $9 Trillion from? I suspect that Mainland China will continue to lend us more and more, I guess the question is, and what will they want in return? Say what you will about the Chinese, but long-term planning in China is measured in 100s of years, not until the next election. What the hell, we will all be dead in 100 years, will let our great-grandchild worry about, right?

I agree 100% that Ron Paul should refund the $500 back to the idiots at Stormfront.org, just as soon as every Democrat and Republican refunds any money they ever received from executives at Enron. Who do you think did more harm to the average American, the executives at Enron or the nutjobs at Stormfront? Oh, but I forgot, the executives at Enron were “normal” people.

Robert B. McDonald
Austin, TX

Posted by: Robert B. McDonald on November 14, 2007 03:13 PM
41. Well, I Guess That Wonkette And RedState Would Prefer To Go Down With The Ship.

Fools Usually Don't Give Up Their Paradigms Easily. Change Is Too Scary For Them; Even In The Face Of Overwhelming Evidence.

If This Be The Battle Ground, So Be It.

The Amount Of Time They Are Going To Have To Put In Will Be Enormous. I, However, Can Take A Break And Five More Will Take My Place To Defend A Virtuous Man.

We Will See Who Has Time To Get Laid.

Good Luck To Your Doomed Endeavor. Avast You Scurvy Dogs !!!

Ron Paul Fights Truth Decay !!!

Posted by: Brad on November 14, 2007 03:17 PM
42. This Is What You Are Up Against You American Constitution Haters:

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=42782

Check It Out And See If You Can Find Anything To Dispute.

Your Quest Dooms Your Fellow Citizen.

Posted by: Brad on November 14, 2007 03:25 PM
43. WVH: why doesn't Paul disavow the more radical elements as other leaders have done?

He does. He has.


You are absolutely correct about people like me who will stay home, I am not a party person for either party. I only volunteer and support school issues, but you are correct in calling me on it. :-)

All are welcome at the caucuses (except those who participate in the process for another party). Join us!

It doesn't mean you are joining the party, only that you want to help choose the GOP candidate and are identifying with the general views of the GOP for the sake of doing so.

Posted by: pudge on November 14, 2007 06:04 PM
44. Pudge,


How can the paul supporters be a minority if they win in the caucuses as you fear?

Travis

Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 14, 2007 06:05 PM
45. I have been called a I have been called a cyber terrorist, RonBot, Paultard, a Joke and sexually frustrated.

"cyber terrorist"... that's a bit harsh, so I think eager enthusiast is better.

"sexually frustrated"...that's outside the scope of knowledge of anyone here... just ignore it....unless... well, nevermind.

"a Joke"... you have to admit, RP IS a fairly entertaining fellow...as for his supporters, well, most zealots do tend to be a tad humorless so that one must be just plain wrong.

"RonBot, Paultard," ... those are just so darn boring, uninspiring and don't roll gently off the tongue... I prefer Ron Paulbearers ... which can be interpreted several ways... you decide ;) wink!

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on November 14, 2007 06:45 PM
46. Ragnar, thanks for the defense of civility, but even your "pallbearers" label is ad hominem and beneath you. You didn't go quite far enough in the direction of reason.

You won't hear me making up names for Giuliani or Romney or their supporters. I won't stoop to that level. It only hurts my cause or my reputation to behave in that way. It is not in my rational self-interest. That is what my favorite author and the creator of your nom de plume, Ayn Rand would have advised.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 14, 2007 09:22 PM
47. I notice that Bruce G hasn't addressed the following questions, civil or not. I am sure that Michael Medved would certainly broadcast the answers to the questions in the letter he addressed to Paul. Have the questions addressed to Paul by Lonestar been answered? Finally, has Daniel Siederaski been given the courtesy of at least a phone call? Talk about civility, is the Paul campaign civil?

Posted by: WVH on November 14, 2007 09:54 PM
48. Hello Pudge,

I suspect that a lot of the Paul people are like a lot of us independents, they don't fit comfortably in either party. I don't fit into the dem party because I do not support abortion, gay marriage, or the government monopoly on schools. I don't believe that there is the brick wall separating church and state that the secular progressives claim. My issue is competition in education and improving the lot of poor children. I don't fit into the republican party either because I support extra support for children like the concept of children's health care. Educators, no matter where they fail on the political spectrum will tell you that children cannot learn if they are hungry or sick. Many children have morons for parents who either cannot or will not provide for them. I am more activist when it comes to children and thus I don't fit the republican ideology. I suspect that many of the Paul people have various issues which make them not a good fit for either party as well. The problem with parties is neither is really a "big tent" and after several spirited threads here, I, like many people, take the view rightly or wrongly that it is a waste of time to spend an evening with a group of people that will stop listening when someone doesn't spout the party line. That may be an incorrect perception, but that is what many of us have. I really wonder how tolerant dems would be of a person against abortion and in favor of pharmacists being allowed to follow their conscience. I wonder how tolerant the republicans would be of someone in favor of children's health care and free meal programs. That is why many of us are indies.

Posted by: WVH on November 14, 2007 10:06 PM
49. Now, now Bruce, such assumptions are not your style... I DID say it can be interpreted several ways.

You could have easily chosen to believe it meant BEARING (as in carrying) PAUL in his windmill-tilting quest for the presidency.

Tsk, tsk, tsk... are you implying his candidacy is DOA?

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on November 14, 2007 11:20 PM
50. WVH: shrug. You can participate and help choose the candidate. if you choose to not participate, that's your business. But remember, the GOP is defined by the people who participate in the GOP.

Posted by: pudge on November 15, 2007 08:55 AM
51. To Eric and Pudge,

Your political theories are behind the times.
The Rural R's thrive in petty coat Junction,but have no chance in the inner city populations.

Hence the Minority in our State legislature,and most of the Counties and Cities.

You both are merely representatives of a R cult now,that is hanging out at the safeway's and churches,gathering signatures for Eyman initiatives...

Put simply outside of this blog the R's are a non factor.

What you guys think will work for the R's won't work here in Washington.

Prediction.
The R's will never have another majority here.
Why,Because there are too few of your types here in Washington State.

You got your butts kicked in Snohomish County,and the last thing you should be doing is ordering the Paul supporters to the back of the bus with everyone Else.
The R's are like the Knight on Monty Python.
First you lost your arm,then the other arm,then a leg,then the other leg,then left to try and bite his foe without limbs..

Needless to say I don't think much of the rural R's at this point.
Their platform sucks and has no chance.
Most of them are idiots.

They now are sitting on the bridge with no arms,No legs,insulting and trying to bite the libertarians instead of reaching out for them to get their arms and legs back.
Without us the R's stand no chance.
The R's need new blood.
Before another Red County goes blue.

Posted by: Publicbulldog on November 16, 2007 09:34 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?