Election 2012

Are Most Ron Paul People This Paranoid?

You know that anti-Huntsman video created by Ron Paul supporters showing Huntsman as a secret agent working for the Chinese?

Via Ashby, this Ron Paul supporter thinks Huntsman created the video as a way to discredit and embarrass the Ron Paul campaign.

Sorry, sir, but Ron Paul and his supporters are doing an excellent job of embarrassing themselves with their make-believe, non-functioning ideas.

  • http://twitter.com/JimmyAbra Jimmy Abraham

    A typical Ron Paul conspiracy theory…it is possible, so, of course, it is happening as long as it fits my ideology. Like the 9/11 truther/Alex Jones’ of the world he panders to…some things don’t seem to jibe, so, let’s make something more insane up and claim that is the “truth.”

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    A clear instance of cognitive rationalization: the cultist invents a story that lets him continue with his belief system. This is why Harold Camping STILL has followers, and Warren Jeffs can convince members of his cult to stop having sex while he’s in prison. The human mind has a limitless capacity to believe dumb things.

  • JMAshby

    Ron Paul supporters accusing Huntsman supporters of a false-flag operation is distinctly Freudian.

  • GrafZeppelin127

    One other thing I keep reading from Paulite libertarians:

    Maybe you should try reading what libertaria­ns say about their own ideology, instead of getting your opinions on the philosophy from those who disagree with it.

    I don’t know about anyone else, but I’ve discovered that if you want to learn what a political philosophy is really about, the last people you want to turn to are its adherents. Yet libertarians are constantly referring me to books and articles written by libertarians, videos made by libertarians, etc., to find out the “truth” about libertarianism. Somehow I doubt that reading and hearing what libertarians say about themselves is going to be enough.

    (I also doubt that libertarians would believe anything a progressive said or wrote about progressivism, but that’s not really the point.)

    • http://twitter.com/JimmyAbra Jimmy Abraham

      Can we call that the “echo chamber argument”?

  • muselet

    Clicked on the link. Big mistake. Lost IQ points. Didn’t quite lose the will to live, but it was, as Wellington said of Waterloo, the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life.

    To save the rest of you the horrors contained therein (DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK! THAT WAY LIES MADNESS!), the author of the article begins from a not-unreasonable premise (that Ron Paul and the Paul campaign might not be responsible for the video), then uses some data from YouTube to prove (where “prove” means to wave one’s arms around wildly and shout) that the video came from the Huntsman campaign with the active participation of the establishment media. Because everyone’s so very afraid of Ron Paul. Or something. It’s all very paranoid and conspiratorial and oh so stupid.

    Incidentally, the next time some denizen of a dark corner of the interwebs uses the expression “false flag,” I swear I will reach down the wires and throttle him. PROTIP: Appropriating a term of art from the military or espionage doesn’t make you sound smarter, it makes you sound very, very dumb.


  • GrafZeppelin127

    I’ve actually been trying to figure out how to characterize the deameanor of Paulite conservatives, as I find time and time again that they’re impossible to talk to because they’re so…. I don’t know if you call it obnoxious, cynical, paranoid, self-righteous, egocentric, &c., and they can’t seem to articulate anything without martyring themselves through florid, vacuous rhetoric and absurd false choices. There’s just something about how libertarians talk and write about their ideas and philosophies that I can’t quite pin down how to describe.

    A sampling of what I’ve encountered on HuffPo over the last few days:

    To me the question is always will we be free or will either the far left or the far right FORCE the majority using the federal gov. to submit as slaves to the other. So the concern for product safety is meaningles­s if we aren’t free.

    Should American citizens choose the path of liberty, then the non-aggres­sion, free-marke­t principles would be the guides, and as Ron Paul has made clear again and again, the final word would always be the Constituti­on.

    “We” did not learn it’s better to live in a bubble-wra­pped world. Please speak for yourself. *I* prefer to live my life with risks and have no inclinatio­n of supporting pre-crime. I do not wish to live in a country with TSA check points, sobriety check points, tazer-happ­y seatbelt police or any other such objects. Wars on drugs, drunk drivers, smokers, or any others do not work. They are wars on liberty and nothing more. If you’re a lawyer, justice, or other bureaucrat then I’m sure this is fine with you, but it does not suit Ron Paul or this Ron Paul supporter.

    So the real issue should be, do we go back to citizens dealing with sludge via civil and possible criminal actions. Or do we continue trying to use Govt agencies to replace our personal actions.

    Polluting other peoples air and water is a violation of property rights. In fact, that is what has effectivel­y stopped pollution. Lawsuits. Government regulation via the EPA has had a minor effect. … You should really do your research more carefully.

    [Response to comment about air-traffic safety regulations:] Yes, planes would crash everywhere­. Get real. Controllin­g airspace is National Defense and that IS part of the federal gov.’s constituti­onal obligation­. That you making an argument to a post about the constituti­on having no idea what the constituti­on even says is pathetic.

    The absence of tens of thousands of regulation­s, or the state government­s being responsibl­e for laws, is not “lawlessne­ss”. In fact, violating the Constituti­on to have an all-powerf­ul federal government is lawlessnes­s, since the Constituti­on is the Supreme Law of the United States.

    Just because you think that being a bigger country than when the constituti­on was AGREED to gives us [read: you] the right to just toss it aside does not mean we can just toss it aside. … And I know our Founding Fathers would never have agreed to any of the amendments made since the Bill of Rights.

    Paul’s ideas have of course been tried. They are the ideas the US was founded on and made us the most prosperous country the world had ever seen. But I guess I’m ‘selfish and cruel’ for wanting to return to that.

    Either you have a complete misunderst­anding of “Ron Paul’s ideas”, or you have zero understand­ing of our very own history (both the US Constituti­on, and Scripture)­. The IDEA of founding the federal government was to get AWAY from big government and create a SMALL central government­. … Our Founding Fathers based this small government on Scripture, which calls for an EVEN smaller government than they envisioned­.

    I’m at a loss to articulate and explain what’s going on with these folks. There’s a lot of generic nastiness and obnoxiousness that’s typical of political partisans, a lot of dudgeon, a lot of egocentric no-one-gets-it-but-me certainty, a lot of broad, vague platitudes substituting for any actual understanding of the law, a lot of self-martyrdom (libertarians seem to really believe that they are heroes, want to feel heroic and want to be perceived as heroic), a lot of false choices, and with them a lot of binary hyperbole (everything is either “freedom” or “enslavement”).

    These people are in love with Ron Paul, and they are in love with libertarianism; they defend each as if it’s their spouse or child. There’s something really creepy about the way some libertarians talk about Paul, about their own ideology, and about themselves. I just can’t nail down how to describe it.

    • missliberties

      When you get it nailed down, what makes these people tic, let us know!!

      Look at the The Paul Bearers logic, like you would a religion. It’s just wrapped in rational sounding dogma of the constitution as it relates to unfettered economics as morality, instead of biblical dogma.

      It is also important to remind these people that the study of economics is not a hard science, it’s a social science.

    • MrDHalen

      Graf, I believe in most cases, libertarians are fueled by the death of white privilege. Most appear (the white ones), to be “the people that time forgot”. The very people who demand we all be judged on merit, hate the fact the we are truly starting to be judged on merit and not color or sex.

      It’s like Louie CK said “only white males would want to time travel to the past.” When they read a history book and realize that throughout a lot of it, people like “THEM” were always in power and did so well, they feel like a prince who has had their throne stolen from them due to the federal government’s actions. Being on top is their birthright, look at the history; never mind how it was achieved.

      As for the non white male libertarians, most have dilutions of grander of their own abilities. They believe all their achievements in life have come from pulling up their own boot straps. Never mind the thousands of others like them who came before and fought oppression to even create an opportunity for them; no, they’ve done everything on their own.

    • desertflower1

      Cult like? In the same vain as followers of Jim Jones. Lose all perspective and screw, I mean, give yourself over.

  • http://twitter.com/SugaRazor Razor

    Ron Paul supporters created the video to make people think that Jon Huntsman created to make Ron Paul look bad. They’re triple agents!

  • http://phydeauxpseaks.blogspot.com Bob Rutledge

    All part of the Repellican Klown Kar Kampaign playbook…

    “Anyone who quotes me is lying”

    “Asking me questions about what I said is ‘gotcha journalism'”

    “My opponents made this video to discredit me”

  • missliberties

    I think they have a point. That video is so vile. It is more than possible if not highly likely that some SuperPac for Romney created that video to slam Paul and help Romney, aka Karl Rove’s Crossroads America.

    Can we use this to make the case for open disclosure re: Citizens United. If you make a video ad you should own it by putting your name on it.