I agree as well!
Posted on 01/02/2012 12:19:23 PM PST by Kaslin
I know that every candidate has passionate supporters, but it’s obvious that Ron Paul’s followers are especially passionate to the point of being downright touchy whenever he is strongly criticized. Or am I being unfair in my assessment?
Last week, I received an email via Townhall from an apparent Ron Paul supporter. He wrote, “You want war with Iran send your own [expletive] kids, not mine. Stop sucking up to Isreal [sic]. What a piece of [expletive] this Townhall spews. One can clearly see your [sic] for the Tea Party of Hate. I know becuase [sic] of your hate for Ron Paul.”
Now, the funny thing is that, in several dozen Townhall articles written in 2011, I mentioned Iran a total of twice (in passing, at that), I mentioned the Tea Party twice (in the space of one article, without criticism or endorsement), and most importantly, I never once mentioned the name of Ron Paul. Not once! Yet somehow I am fashioned a Ron Paul hater.
Obviously, this is just one email from an anti-Israel, anti-Tea Party, profanity-using, spelling-challenged reader, and in no way do I judge Ron Paul or the rest of his supporters by one foolish email. Of course not. And yet, there’s something all too familiar about this pro-Paul email, specifically, its unusually rabid tone.
It is an open secret that no one has supporters who are more devoted, loyal, or committed than Ron Paul, and if other candidates had followers as dedicated as his, the current political landscape would look very different.
So is that the answer to my question? Is it simply that Paul’s followers are more passionate than others, implying that they will also be more defensive and even touchy?
Or is this overly simplistic? Perhaps the real issue is that, for years, the media has seemingly failed to give Paul his due, giving other candidates more coverage and attention and even time to respond in public debates. And so Paul’s followers have simply had it with being slighted, becoming especially sensitive to criticism.
Or maybe Paul’s supporters have emulated some of his own style, being more didactic than dynamic and more cantankerous than charismatic? Maybe this is one the reasons they are attracted to him?
Or could it be that as a libertarian, he gives voice to causes and stands up for values that few other candidates believe in or espouse? Although he is a long-time politician, he is also outside the main stream on many key issues, and so, he is not only embraced as a political candidate but also as a champion of the people, an anti-establishment hero to be defended and backed with tenacity and zeal. It’s not every candidate who writes a book on “Revolution” and really means it. (Hey, when he talks about the need for revolutionary change, he’s speaking my language too.)
Or is it something else? Could it be that his positions are so extreme that it leaves his followers vulnerable and defensive? After all, when your candidate downplays the threat of radical Islam (even though its adherents probably surpass the adult population of America in number), when he chooses not to recognize the very real danger of a nuclear weapon in the hands of Iran (despite all the blood currently on Iran’s hands), when one of his former senior aides, Eric Dondero, claims that Paul is anti-Israel, how can his supporters not be hyper-sensitive to criticism? (According to Dondero, while Paul is neither a racist nor an anti-Semite, he is “most certainly Anti-Israel, and Anti-Israeli in general. He wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all. . . . He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs.”)
I actually have no axe to grind when it comes to Ron Paul, nor do I have a dog in this fight. Is he really anti-Israel, or is there a solid answer to the charges against him? Are his foreign policies naïve, or does he really understand the nature of anti-American “blowback”? Are some of his radical monetary proposals the very thing we need, or is he arguing for changes that can never occur? Has he been wishy-washy on important social issues like homosexual activism, or does he really espouse conservative morality? And is he a man of trustworthy character, or is he being dishonest when he disavows knowledge of many of his past newsletters?
These are questions for others to answer, and despite the hostile comments that can be expected in response to this article, I am not hostile to Ron Paul. My question has to do with his followers.
Why are they so touchy? Or am I being unfair?
Libertarian’s and Liberal’s are tolerant of ,and open minded towards, anyone who agrees with them 100% of the time.
That is a distortion “constitutional purist” that paulbots state all the time, it simple is not true.
I saw this saying the other day and it was brilliant,
“Ron Paul is to the Constitution as Fred Phelps is to the Bible.”
Bingo. He has pretty much lived off his rhetoric for the past three to four decades with only very brief stints in medicine. Back when he had his 'ghostwritten' (lol) newsletters, he and his family were earning about a million a year off them. Selling books and writing newsletters means you don't actually have to accomplish anything, you just yack. About as effective on substantial policy as the guy in a coffee shop rambling about the ills of the world. As Winston Churchill once said, at some point you have to start judging results.
I hate being called "touchy" even more than I hate being called a "paultard". I'm sensitive like that.
Wow, whoever coined that must be friggin brilliant. LOL :->
How about the fact that he thinks Bradley Manning is a patriot? Does that make him a nut? How about the fact that he blames 9/11 on the US and not bin Laden? Does that make him a nut?
...and Earmark king Paul has been right in the middle of it for the past 30 years and has accomplished jack and squat about it. He is no more effective than the guy in everyone’s hometown coffee shop rambling in the corner about the ills of the world.
As Winston Churchill once said, at some point you have to start judging results.
“He is anything but a mindless zealot...”
Paul supporters do come in all shapes and sizes, but I have to go with the percentages personally experienced.
You should’ve have seen them at CPAC. Mostly fitting the same demographic; young, idealistic, inexperienced, and naive.
Lies, such as? I cannot think of any politician who does not twist The Constitution. Phelps, I do not know. So who is your ideal Constitutional Conservative? I am asking sincerely. Some RP folks tried to draft me? into their ranks years ago, unsuccessfully. Instead of name calling and insults we had many rather robust debates, learning a lot. I am having trouble getting behind any candidate right now. I did like Cain because abolishing the 14th is a great start, but we have to have someone with integrity. Who is that to you?
I can’t dispute that.
His following is cultish.
Myself I have decided Perry is my #1. However I acknowledge he has faults and don’t get all huffy is someone else has a different #1.
“New imagery for me. I like it.”
‘Glass cannon’ has been around a little while. It is a good image though of something which is as fragile as it is potentially powerful. ‘Loose cannon’ is still my favorite.
Heh. Paul could be both, come to think of it.
“off handedly dismissed as a nut w/o explanation.”
I don’t think that’s fair, we all saw him in the debates, saying that it’s our fault we were attacked 9/11, that we have no interest in defending Israel, that street drugs should be legalized, that we’ve murdered millions in Iraq, etc.
It is nothing but nutty.
And interesting debate! As long as rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, then they can't do much for Israel? I'm with you. The Messiah (Jesus) is the only hope for Israel and the United States.
“Ron Paul is to the Constitution as Fred Phelps is to the Bible.”
Ouch.
WHAT DO YOY MEAN BY TOUCHY !!!!!!!!!!!
THEM’S FIGHTIN WORDS
Thanks Kaslin.
Cheers!
Not enough sun, they need to get out more.
I agree as well!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.