Why the Ron Paul Campaign is Dangerous

NewsBull ^ | November 11, 2007 | JB Williams

[PlainOleAmerican]

I hate wasting this much press time on Ron Paul. But the Paul campaign is becoming a real threat to the Republican primary process and if allowed to continue, he will take votes away from the most conservative Republican candidates in the party, not the most liberal. This is bad for the party and the country.

(snip)

So, how Republican is Republican candidate Ron Paul?

If he’s funded largely by anti-war leftists, from Democrat stronghold districts and counting on Democrats, Libertarians and members of the Green Party to win the Republican nomination, not very…

[William Terrell]

Begin to return our domestic scene to its constitutional limits.

[april15Bendovr]

“But they’re not - and can be prosecuted precisely because the government is properly empowered to do so. Causing or threatening harm is one thing; simple possession of an inanimate object is something else entirely.”

Prove to me that street drugs aren't harmful? There is a hospital in Boston that hands out needles to drug addicts. After they use the needle its thrown on the ground in an area where children play.

Also tell me that getting high the minute a person wakes up in the morning as a parent isn't harmful to the well being of their child.

[listenhillary]

Alex Jones show call in.

CALLER: I want a complete, impartial, and totally independent investigation of the events of September 11, 2001 . I’m tired of this bogus garbage about terrorism. Ask Michael Meacher about how he feels about this bogus war on terrorism. Can you comment on that please?

HON. DR. RON PAUL: Well, that would be nice to have. Unfortunately, we don’t have that in place. It will be a little bit better now with the Democrats now in charge of oversight.

[ctdonath2]

There is a difference between simple possession and deliberate action.

Further discussion warrants another thread on beating a stain where a dead horse used to be.

[SubGeniusX]

Meet-ups “organized by Sierra Club members would hadly qualifies as Soros being one of RP’s “Largest” donors...

don’t be another liar

[lormand]

The steps you took to block these images are futile. I can't believe it took me more than 1/2 to think of an easy bypass, but it's every easy.

Ron Paul has jumped the shark of sanity. Supporting him is here is also futile. Nobody in their right mind here wants to back someone who blames America for Islamic hate and wants to pull out of one of the most important foreign policy objectives in our lifetime.

He is dead wrong, and supporting him here is idiotic.

[logician2u]

The Sierra Club has organized Ron Paul Meetups. They are heavily funded by the Tides Foundation and George Soros.

If by "they" you mean the Sierra Club, I can believe that's possible.

You'll need some proof to show that any Ron Paul Meetups are funded by either Tides of Soros, or, for that matter, that any but pro-Democrat meetups have been started by "The Sierra Club."

If individual members of the Sierra Club are Paul supporters, more power to them. I would expect, though, that more are in the Billary or Edwards camp, or possibly Romney's, since those candidates are more attuned to the global warming hysteria.

Ron Paul, as you may expect, does not believe we need draconian federal regulations to prevent a dubious catastrophe.

But then, why be constrained by the facts when making things up is so much more satisfying?

[George W. Bush]

GWB - I use Firefox as my browser, teach me how to block the Paul pics.

There are several ways that vary in how much effort it takes and how useful it is for adblocking from other sites, not just the Paul-hater spam.

First, there is the Firefox extension, AdBlock Plus, which you can download and install via the official encrypted server.

Adblock Plus :: Firefox Add-ons

It also lets you control on a site-by-site basis whether ads are allowed or forbidden, whether Flash or Java are allowed to run, etc. It is also very easy to just disable it for a site or just click a filter off so you can again see the site unfiltered for a moment to check it out, then re-enable it.

There is a helper extension called Filterset.G which is a set of filters that are updated and added to the blocklist in AdBlock Plus that keeps you up to date with all the latest attempts to sneak unwelcome ads into your browser pages.

Adblock Filterset.G Updater :: Firefox Add-ons

So if you see a graphic you don't like, for instance, darkwing's graphic on his posts, you can right-click it and select AdBlock Image from the popup menu. It will show you a simple filter that looks like this:

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/darkwing104/darkwing1.gif

Now, it will offer you by default to block only that one image from darkwing's Photobucket account. However, you can just remove the picture name and use a wildcard instead:

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/darkwing104/*

Now everything that darkwing tries to post here from his Photobucket account will disappear permanently. This is the rule I use for Darkwing.

The same applies for Petronski's and lormand's little graphics. Here are rules to dispatch their trollish graphics:

http://home.alltel.net/petronski/*
http://home.austin.rr.com/rlormand/*

Notice that refusing to contact their home webspaces also prevents them from logging your IP address to identify you by IP address (assuming they are controlling a server and know how to use such info). However, it does identify them in certain ways to anyone curious enough to check. Just a little security heads-up. Since I mentioned them and was using their entries in my blocking software, I thought I should flag them. Naturally, doing this kind of thing on your own ISP account is bad security practice. Darkwing is much smarter, IMO, to shield himself by using Photobucket.

---

Alternatively, you can manually modify your hosts file to block servers or pictures/files on those servers from ever loading. Essentially, a hosts file is filled with entries of server addresses and where you wish to route them. So you could make a site like dailykos.com never again accessible with an entry like:

127.0.0.1 dailykos.com

The advantage here is that such an entry utterly and completely blocks any traffic for that site permanently. The 127.0.0.1 address is a loopback address that tells your TCP/IP stack to look for the file or graphic on your own machine and, since it doesn't exist there, it will fail to load entirely and will not so much as send a single request to the server specified on the web page you were loading. And a hosts file blocks network access for every browser and networking program on your computer, not just for Firefox.

More on using hosts file to block ads: Blocking Unwanted Parasites with a Hosts File

Our early informal efforts to discipline libmedia sites is working well. But we need to become more systematic about it. I am looking into offering an updating filterlist for AdBlock Plus that is only for RP supporters. It will block ads from sites that are nasty to RP but allow you to consume their stories without helping their ad revenue. So they would get traffic but no ad displays. Or it could be used to disable (by default) all access to anti-RP sites completely (though a user could click and re-enable it if they choose). Such a filterlist could be controlled by a small committee of RP supporters who decide on a weekly basis which sites to reward with clicks and ad revenue and increased traffic and which sites to punish.

FR has, in its way, influenced the media and its coverage. I'm interested in a systematic way of really harnessing click power and hitting the dying media giants where it counts just as they attempt their real transition to web media. And we need to demonstrate that we aren't going to forget what they've said to disrespect us, our candidate and our movement.

For obvious reasons, such tactics can't work at FreeRepublic. It's immune to such influence. The Robinsons are pretty bullet-proof, LOL. Besides, FR is still the host of the RLC Caucus.

Well, I hope that wasn't too geeky.

[George W. Bush]

The steps you took to block these images are futile. I can't believe it took me more than 1/2 to think of an easy bypass, but it's every easy.

Tinypic.com won't help much, nor will the other usual means. BTW, TinyPic is an offical Ron Paul supporter so all of you who use it should be aware that its use actually helps Ron Paul. But you are certainly welcome to try to boycott it if you feel that is in your best interest. And you'll spend more time trying to break through my filters with your images than I will blocking you again. Uphill fight for you. But you are welcome to spend your spare time trying to. In fact, I urge you to do so. Start now. LOL.

[lormand]

"I see “conservatism” redefining itself into trying to preserve big government..."

What a cliche and weak comeback. Only Ron Paul trolls from DU (who are part of the campaign) support both big government AND cut and run in Iraq policies. That stupid tactic is tried, over and over again.

Using your logic, if you are not a nutball libertarian like Ron Paul and his Paulistinians, then you are for big government.

That kind of retort works at community college forums, but not here.

"Just in the last few years it’s been amazing the turn of many FReepers toward what was not long ago deemed “liberalism”."

I'm sure you are talking about me. Please post examples which prove what you are saying.

I'm sure your response will be a doozy and whopper which will be fun to analyze.

[april15Bendovr]

Ron Pauls cash donations don't pass the FR smell test. Its like sniffing the armpit of Helen Thomas

[lormand]

Speaking of geeky....

Just rename them and post them on different addresses.

Now you get to see them again....he he!

Hey, can you post this again, but use Ron Paul spammers as examples of how to block, since it would be a far more accurate example of how a common Freeper would use it.

For example...

http://www.ronpaulforums/*
http:/suicidemonkeysforpaul/*
http://DUandMOVONtrollsforpaul/*

...would be a better example on this forum.

[George W. Bush]

Go ahead and do it. I'm fine with it. Dedicate all your spare time to it.

You'll find that, much like FR, the RP sites are pretty immune to these tactics because we are also user-supported. In fact, it would be to our advantage for you to attempt it.

[lormand]

The steps you took validate what you really think about Ron Paul and his supporters, not anything that would bother me about blocking these images.

BTW, one can open more than one hole in your "security". You would need an "n" number of filters for every image.

Your method only works for people who don't want to bother countering it....like myself.

[lormand]

"Go ahead and do it. I'm fine with it. Dedicate all your spare time to it."

I'm not going to bother with it.

Ron Paul spammers blocking my images?

What sane person would NOT be honored by that?

[George W. Bush]

You forget there are additional methods which I’m not revealing here. Like I said, knock yourself out. Use a machine hammer.

[darkwing104]

I am beging to believe that censorship is a paulestinian value...I'll remember that the next time they mention Constitution ot The Bill of Rights.

Heavens forbid if the paulestinians are censored, that would make us haters

Now they are showing themselves as Hypocrites.

[George W. Bush]

Now they are showing themselves as Hypocrites.

Nonsense. You are free to try to spam us. We are equally free to block your spam.

You aren't going to start crying or something, are you?

[lormand]

"Now they are showing themselves as Hypocrites."

Big time!

However, like I stated in a previous post, I consider it an honor to be blocked by a Ron Paul spammer.

[lormand]

Which graphic in particular urks you the most?