Ron Paul fanatics banned from RedState
Many of you know that I'm a Director of RedState.com, one of the top righty blogs on the web. Earlier today, our site decided that enough was enough with the crazy, and that loony Ron Paul's loony following would no longer be welcome on our private property.
The reaction of Paul's supporters? Well, let's just say that it reinforced the correctness of our decision one thousand-fold. From the obnoxiously persistent (and belligerent) return of those whom we banned (who, though every one claims to be a "lifelong conservative Republican and Reagan voter," can never seem to get their heads around the idea of private property, and the fact that the First Amendment doesn't mean that we have to listen to them), to the comments about the situation on Paul-supporting message boards, the crazies are coming out in full force in response to, well, being called crazy.
Some choice comments (edited for language) from "The Daily Paul," a Ron Paul-supporting site, in response to RedState's move:
Welcome to the Revolution!(Riiiight)
That site and their dead party are no longer important. We've killed it.
We are the New Republican Party and the New Democratic Party and MORE! This Revolution will fill up the nations capitol with freedom loving Revolutionaries across the political spectrum.
Ron Paul is just the catalyst. We are the reaction.
Viva la Revolution!
RedState is a Neo-Con Circle Jerk(Very civil.)
they are socialists (NeoCons) and don't hide the fact...(Don't ask me how the combination works to them, outside of just being handy epithets to throw around).
we should ask google to censor anyone or any corporation who censors free speech.(Again, it's private property over at RedState, so the "right to free speech" isn't applicable...but I'm willing to bet that these folks are perfectly fine "censoring" that "free speech" which might be critical of Ron Paul.)
Neocons equal bunch of little b****es communist b****rds.(Nothing really to say to that, other than "you sound a little too angry for this to just be about your choice for President.")
And here's my favorite:
This is further evidence thatthe Republican base should be written off. It is a waste of campaign resources where there is so much resistance.(But remember: every one of these people is a "lifelong conservative Republican." Or at least they're programmed to spit that out when called on the carpet).
The rEVOLution ought to be making common cause with CODE PINK. They are passionate antiwar activists and are willing to cause trouble. They are seriously on-fire about civil liberties and constitutional rights. Visit their blogs at
http://codepinkalert.org/CODE PINK
What can we do to get this going? This is a fantastic opportunity!Join up. Sign their petitions. Comment on their posts. Go to their rallies. I would like to see Ron Paul showing up at their rallies.
About all I can say about this is, were I running for President, then these sure are the types of people I'd want representing me.
Or not.
Then again, it's not like the candidate himself is all that sane, either, now, is it?
Labels: Blog
8 Comments:
-
At 11:51 PM,
steppo said...
-
I'm not at all certain that labeling someone a "loony" is a good way to present your point of view. You might think so, but it seems a bit counter-productive.
-
At 8:58 AM,
Bobby Coggins said...
-
People hanging bedsheets off overpasses aren't loonies?
-
At 10:22 PM,
absentee said...
-
We have the bedsheet thing in Charlotte too. Lame.
-
At 10:24 PM,
said...
-
I loved this caption from the "Prison Planet" link:
Paul offered his take on why the government seemed to be acting in a deranged and reckless manner on every issue.
Uhh, yes, you would KNOW deranged, wouldn't you! -
At 10:30 PM,
Jeff Emanuel said...
-
Heh. I enjoyed that, Dave, almost as much as I enjoyed the Ron Paul warning against President Bush bringing in foreign troops to use in enforcing martial law in America -- especially the part about butting heads with the UN being a ruse to hide that plot from people.
But hey, he's not nuts at all. -
At 12:25 AM,
said...
-
This move troubles me. I'm probably talking to the wind in today's political climate where voicing opposition equates to consorting with "the enemy." But I'm truly an undecided Republican who has not yet ruled Paul out.
What bothers me about this move is that it signals the end of the "Big Tent" days, and "The Party of Ideas." When we censor the viewpoints of members of our own party, we contribute to its break-up. While it's true that RedState is private property, the site is acting unilaterally as a representative of the party itself. The message that just got sent to the nation is: "our way or the highway." I shudder to think of what would have happened if local stations took measures to censor supporters of Robert Taft or Barry Goldwater.
But this is all cursory to my real problem with this move, which is the fact that whether I agree with him or not, Dr. Paul is bringing new people into the party. I spoke with our local Republican committee chairwoman last week, and was suprised to learn that in a day when Republicans are viewed so negatively, she's seeing a noticable increase in the registration of young voters like she can't ever remember, which she attributed to Dr. Paul. That certainly caught my attention, because if we don't replenish our party with youth, we're going to have a hard time keeping our own relevancy in an atmosphere which is becoming increasingly socialist.
I diagree with Dr. Paul on the issue of the war, but I have to say, I stand behind his conservative positions on just about every other topic. So I'm at a crossroads at how I define my conservativism. Do I definte it by my position on the Iraq war? Or do I define it by my position on the role of government.
I'm very nervous about the idea that such a popular conservative website wants to chase Dr. Paul out of the party before giving his ideas the opportunity to run their course in the market. The fact is, with his substantial war chest, his ideas WILL get their day in the spotlight. And we should know better than anyone that conservativism sells.
My true fear is that this move is the first shot in the war that splits the Republican party along the lines that I find myself split on. If Dr. Paul were to accept the Libertarian Party nomination, and use his significant new-found fundraising clout to build a base over there, all the work that Reagan did in bringing the Libertarian wing into the Republican fold would be undone.
Like it or not, Dr. Paul has a message that is appealing to conservatives -- despite his views on the Iraq war. Surely nobody has forgotten how Nader cost Gore the election: by peeling off enough Democrats who wanted to send a message to their party.
RedState has fired the first shot and sent a message to the nation on behalf of the Republican party. I'm a little more than anxious to find out just how the other foot will drop.
Meanwhile, I'll continue to search for the small government conservative who is willing to go the distance (whatever it may be) in Iraq. But I'm beginning to wonder if there is even such a thing. -
At 9:52 AM,
Unknown said...
-
Fred08.com
-
At 1:14 PM,
said...
-
I am sad to see RedState take such an action. You present your website as a sounding board for issues. Your actions say something different. Scary!