1 Actually, I don't mind the Ron Paul campaign.

By serving as a magnet for those with loony ideas about the nature of reality, it makes it easy to identify the nut-cases amongst those I know.

If it wasn't for Ron Paul, these folks would just find another Dear Leader to follow... like, say, Ross Perot. It's not like the Paulites are gonna support someone (relatively) reasonable like Fred or Mitt or even Rudy.

2 I was very disappointed this weekend to see that Maurices BBQ here in South Carolina had Ron Paul pamphlets available for customers. Maurices BBQ is famous for their carolina style mustard based BBQ. They are equally famous (or imfamous) for continuing to fly the Confederate flag in front of their restaurants even after it was removed from the top of SC State House. I've always supported the right of private citizens to display their heritage, but with the new revelations about Paul, I am beginning to doubt that this is about history.

3 Mustard-based?

Sir, do not besmirch all that is holy by intoning that slop is actually BBQ.

4 1. Odd that a blog that calls itself "Confederate" Yankee has such a problem with a candidate who seems to have some Confederate sympathies himself.

2. "Ron Paul needs to go away."

Are you truly this shallow and myopic, CCG, or are you simply as petty as the NRO that you love-to-hate in other posts? How is it that you've missed the point that Ron Paul, for all his warts, is simply an rallying-figure for an America that has lost its faith in this war, this government, this president, this Madam Speaker (and her ilk), these media, this political "process" that will only install another RepubliCrat in the White House who will uphold the status quo during his/her tenure, etc, etc, ad nauseum? With the Paul campaign, you are getting a dose of bonafide, heartland America,* and like your Lefty counterparts, mis-portray it as 'AmeriKKKa' as much as you can.

What is most telling about your reaction to the skeletons in Paul's closet, however, is how very dated your thinking is. You assume that the Ron Paul campaign is about Ron Paul--much like the Bushists (if indeed there are any still out there) and Clintonistas make their campaign efforts ABOUT their Chosen Ones instead of whatever issues they seem to endorse (because if they did indeed make it about ISSUES, the self-styled Right and Left would see that there isn't enough of a difference between the two parties to make voting for one or the other worth one's while.) So no, the Ron Paul voter won't be making a cult out of Paul's middle initial or his fabled charismatic charm (he really hasn't any); they are simply sick of a Washington that no longer really cares about We The People it pretends to represent, and it is an indictment of the Bush-cum-Clinton camp that someone as lacking as Ron Paul can make such a showing.

Ergo, the 'PaulBots' are quite the opposite of the knee-jerk supporters the slur suggests--instead of the mental calisthenics Bush or Clinton supporters often turn in order to wrap their minds around their candidate's every piss-poor decision, the Paulists feel that they actually OWN this 'revolution' and that not even Paul himself can derail it. Nonetheless, why you can't seem to get the age-old concept of the-message-is-bigger-than-the-man is not really so baffling: You're just working off the ancien politics of yesteryear, where political parties and machines matter so much. So, as-you-were, "Confederate" Yankees: Go on denouncing, ridiculing, belittling, etc.: It only shows that like your Lefty complements, you are both out of touch with America and afraid of it at once.

(*Heartland Americans are, by-and-large, conspiracy theorists by nature, it seems, and poll after poll has shown their inherent distrust of the government's versions of what happened at Waco, or to the Alfred P. Murrah Building, or in Dallas on November 22, 1963 for that matter. This is old hat. [This distrust of centralized Washington is as American as apple pie, too--T. Jefferson: "Our kind of government is not based on trust...it is based on suspicion."]

Americans are, by-and-large, isolationists.

Americans are, by-and-large, against unrestricted access to abortion.

Americans are, by-and-large, suspicious of the UN.

Americans are, by-and-large, against any kind of special recognition or state sanction of homosexuality.

Etc.

These are planks in the Paul campaign, donchaknow, and it wouldn't matter if a talking toad were to croak these issues, a great many Americans would echo the same.)

5 j, how this blog's name came about is very well documented, and has nothing whatsoever with successionist nutters, but thanks for trying the ad hom.

Paul does attract disaffected portions of America, which is fine, but he has never made more than (even?)a half-hearted attempt to separate himself from extremists, and is now well documented, is either one himself, or willing to lend his name to them for decades at a time.

You are judged by the company you keep, and in Paul's case, that is not a pretty picture at all.

6 Slop? If you wake up at dawn tomorrow, and there's a guy dressed like Colonel Sanders on your lawn carrying dueling pistols, don't go outside.

7 Again you seem to be missing the boat: The "disaffected portions of America" you speak of are, whether you'd like to admit it or not, *mainstream*. He has tapped into this mainstream, which is why both Montana militia-types and left-leaning urbanites who are posting his banners downtown find themselves under the same aegis for once. My point to your posts is that he is larger than himself, and that imagining that if Ron Paul were to go away his so-called movement would disappear only constitutes naive wishful thinking on your part.

8 Mainstream? 3% of the population is "mainstream?" What's the new slogan gonna be j? "the 3% mainstream rEVOLution?" Bwahahahahaha!!!!!

9 Capitalist Infidel:

The mainstream of disaffected nutcases, perhaps? ;-)

10 No, fools: The "Great Silent Majority" Nixon talked about, who do, in fact, hold to the values I listed above. The 3% are only the most impassioned, I would imagine--remnants of once die-hard Dems or Repubs. Disaffected as the mainstream is, it will probably continue to vote RepubliCrat for some time to come, or not at all (as many Americans don't): You have no idea how many people I've spoken to who've said, "I *would* vote for him, but don't think he has a chance of winning." They connect with him, you see, these average Americans you (and the Leftists) decry as "disaffected nutcases"; you think a mere 3% has given him 100% of the money and support they have? I haven't done jack-squat for the man, so I wouldn't register in the 3% either.

Keep dancin', tho, 'round and 'round the fact that the RP phenomena-thingy is, as I said, "an indictment of the Bush-cum-Clinton camp [when considering that] someone as lacking as Ron Paul can make such a showing."

11
Keep dancin', tho, 'round and 'round the fact that the RP phenomena-thingy is, as I said, "an indictment of the Bush-cum-Clinton camp [when considering that] someone as lacking as Ron Paul can make such a showing."


Squirrels have always gathered nuts. It is in their nature. It doesn't make him king of the forest, or any more special than even the last squirrel.

12 "Squirrels have always gathered nuts."

Interesting. That is what most of the world said when Bush got a second term.

13 Since Paul gets about 3% of the vote what did that make Perrot who got around 20%?

14 J,

Ron Paul is a nut job. Does he have some positions that I can agree with? Yes. I'm sure Jeffrey Dahmer had some positions that I could agree with too, but that doesn't make him any less of a nut job.

Your belief in Ron Paul makes you either simple, or also a nut job. Your "revolution" is lovely to see in all of its glory, winning primary after primary. You and your revolution are the equals of the Kucinich revolution. You will have as much success, and people with think just as highly of you and crazy Paul when it is all over.

No matter how you try to defend it, Paul is a racist, anti-semetic, conspiracy theorist. Either he is too sloppy and stupid to check what goes out under his name for over 20 years (which makes him stupid and sloppy), or he actually agrees with what was sent out under his name (and which, by the way, put money in his pocket) for 20 years. Either way, the guy is an idiot and a bad person. How you, and the rest of the bots that are unable to see facts staring you in the face, manage to rationalize around this, is insane.

I'm willing to admit that Bush does a lot of things I don't like, but those are policy decisions that I disagree with, not racism, anti-semitism, and paranoid conspiracy theories. You are agreeing with the latter, not the former.

15 Long-simmering rumors about his ties to bigots of many stripes have lurked in the background for years, only explode yesterday with well-documented examples of racism, hatred towards gays, and murky associations with conspiracy theorists, neo-Nazis, and successionists.

I think you mean "secessionists", as in people who want to secede.

(What is a "successionist"? Someone who strives to succeed, perhaps? Sounds good to me.)


J: say all you like that Democrats and Republicans are "out of touch with the mainstream". The bottom line, however, is the votes. If Ron Paul can't get enough votes to make a difference, then putting a talking toad in his place won't help.

So far he doesn't have it. Never mind getting as many votes as Ross Perot did; so far he hasn't even gotten the 7% John Anderson did in 1980.

When a candidate's positions are truly more "mainstream" than his or her opponents, the ballots will prove it. So I'll happily eat my words, sincerely and profoundly, when President Paul is inaugurated. I will, that is, provided YOU are willing to eat YOUR words if-and-when Rep. Paul's "rEVOLution" fizzles and burns out, as I strongly suspect it will.

There's nothing wrong with starting a new movement and doing your best to get momentum for it. But declaring yourself the winner before the contest starts -- well, that's just silly.

respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline

16 If Ron Paul steps aside, who will step forward to lead his fanatical followers. David Duke?

17 First of all, you have demonstrated yourself in the same mold as the rest of the PC brain-washed masses. Pointing out that the government is not being forthcoming or honest about what happened on 9/11 one earns the label "conspiracy theorist". If a person thinks that whites have as many rights as blacks, then "neo-Nazi". If a person has kin folk who served in the Confederate Army and embraces their Southern Heritage, then lets call them "successionists". Certainly no one wants to be labeled any of those things so everyone keeps quiet.

I'm actually not a big fan of Ron Paul, but I am supporting his campaign. We need a few more people in the public arena to be ask the right questions and not be afraid of the narrow-minded bigots such as the author of this hit piece.

18 Ron Paul no longer represents Texas District 22. He represents Texas District 14.

19 I am amazed at the venomin against Ron Paul. He certainly has some groups that support him that are outside of conventional political thought. But at the same time, he is the only candidate that has a conservative message and truly desires to get the government out of our lives. Why do you people want the government to wipe your backsides and decide every aspect of your lives?

20 David, please look at the policy positions of former Senator Fred Dalton Thompson, and then tell me again that Ron Paul is the only candidate that is espousing limited government... if you can do it with a straight face, that is.

21 Interesting. That is what most of the world said when Bush got a second term.

While America was saying "No, thank you." to John Kerry. Thing is, the rest of the world doesn't get a vote. But what were they saying when they elected or reelected Blair, Howard, Merkel, Sarkozy, etc...?

22 CCG posted "David, please look at the policy positions of former Senator Fred Dalton Thompson, and then tell me again that Ron Paul is the only candidate that is espousing limited government... if you can do it with a straight face, that is."

How many Americans can vote for the continuation of American Empire with over 700 overseas military bases in over 130 countries as our own infrastructure, housing market, dollar value and overall economy continue to crumble. Fred Thompson is another pompous ass who wants to "kick ass" in the Middle East.
Please, my fellow Americans: Don't stir up hornets' nests around the world. Our children will get stung. Let's elect a president who will stop wasting 1/2 of our income taxes to buy weapons and piss off 130 countries. Only Kucinich, Paul and Gravel will do this.