11 thoughts on “Pop-Quiz for Paulites

    • Well, yes and no. I’m not scared that Ron might actually become president – even he knows it’s never gonna happen (and every time he sees one of you true believers who thinks otherwise, I suspect he laughs all the way to the bank) – but I am scared that Paulism might represent a broader willingness among conservatives to abandon America’s national security and embrace rank dishonesty & uncritical thinking.


      • Unfortunately I’d have to agree and say he won’t become president either. Of course for the exact opposite reasons you state, namely America doesn’t engage in critical thinking and just rely on 30 second soundbites and the media to make up their mind. But if the GOP wants to nominate a Mitt Romney and think that’s going to change a thing in this country, well it’s going to be great entertainment for those like me who have figured the system out and that nothing changes.

        I didn’t quite get the thing about laughing all the way to the bank, if you meant it that way. First, I don’t think you know too much about Ron Paul yet if you’d think he’d laugh at his supporters. And second, Ron Paul is in this because of ideas, if that wasn’t obvious enough by comparing him to the other Tea Party star Sarah Palin. Now there’s someone who is laughing all the way to the bank.


  1. I’d wager I know much more about Paul than many of Paul’s own supporters, and it’s precisely because I have taken the time to examine his record that I so fiercely oppose his cancerous influence within conservatism.

    Paul knows he will never be president. For him, it’s all about fame & money as America’s Last True Conservative Patriot Leader (TM). Granted, a fair part of his base is made up of well-meaning conservatives who are (rightly) dissatisfied with GOP establishment, and are desperate for someone they think will stand for the Constitution & not compromise his principles.

    But Paul also figured out somewhere along the line that there was a sizable, largely-untapped pool of bigots and conspiracy theorists who were crying out for a candidate of their own, someone with just enough credibility to validate their own ideas, and just enough power to give them hope that he might contribute to seeing some of their dreams realized.

    So Paul set out to be that somebody, and ever since he has exploited, indulged, and promoted as much of their prejudice and paranoia as he thinks he can get away with at any given time. And just like that, he became the Chosen One in the minds of America’s worst, the object of their undying devotion – and, of course, their donations.


  2. You couldn’t be more wrong. So are you inviting me to quiz you on Ron Paul’s books and to ask you questions that only a reader would know the answers to? Somehow I doubt you haven’t even read one of Ron Paul’s books, but please provide a list of the ones you have read if I am wrong. Please as I am looking forward to quizzing you. And in the remote possibility you haven’t read his books that would be a shameful for you to claim you know so much about this man yet not even read his work! And since I constantly see his positions distorted by you and others I strongly suspect you haven’t the slightest clue of him. Not to mention I’d imagine all your sources are nearly all from neoconservative or other liberal outlets.

    Show me hard numbers of the money Paul is making since 2008 before you start making blind accusations. As you claim to be a most knowledgeable source on Dr. Paul, surely you know he doesn’t partake in the lucrative congressional pension program, right? That is oddly missing from above; did you not have the integrity to admit that? And sure he has come out with a book, but he’s been writing books for many years now. He is 75 years old! Money clearly isn’t a motivation of his this late in the game. Yet I bet I could dig up articles by you defending Sarah Palin for resigning as Alaska’s governor, when it is quite obvious she quit for monetary gain. Are you now willing to admit that was her prime motivation for quitting?

    It is quite well-documented why Ron Paul first entered politics, and if you attack as a leftist would and claim he’s a racist and conspiracy theorist (sounds similar to what liberals say about Beck) then once again I am not sure if we are talking about the same person here.

    And finally, it isn’t about Ron Paul. It’s about the ideas of small government and the Constitution. The problem is Ron is the only one espousing these traditional conservative views. For all his faults as a person, politician, associations, etc., it’s the ideas that count. I’d support any other politician who believed in small government and a strong national defense in accordance with early conservative intellectuals. I’d think you’d even agree that it would be much more productive to talk about ideas than quibble over a man’s character. But you’ve shown you are interested more in attacking the man, not in the battleground of ideas.

    P.S. David Horowitz did embarrassingly bad on Hannity tonight, and I say that as honestly and objective as I can be. At least strictly speaking about debate skills.


    • Wait – the only way to know valid information about Ron Paul is to read HIS OWN BOOKS? Spoken like a true religious acolyte.

      My most recent NewsReal posts (and my refutation of various critiques of those posts in the comments) substantiate everything I’ve said about Paul, and I’ve got at least one more post coming for this blog (possibly two) that will make that case even stronger.

      You’ve spouted his own party line quite well. Which is pretty much what I expected – and the fact that you can’t help yourself from trying to deflect attention onto others and whine about Palin & Horowitz is extremely telling, as well. Personally, while I have defended Palin against some attacks in the past, I have always had my doubts as to her ultimate value to conservatism – and her thoughtless, irresponsible endorsement of Rand has given a strong indication that she’s not a serious leader after all.


  3. Wow Calvin, it is the height of arrogance to think you already know what Paul is all about without having read anything of substance by him. You may be in for a few surprises. It would also explain your frequent misinterpretations of Paul’s positions. If all that’s been fed to you is Horowitz sources, yes I completely understand why you would have a distorted view of Paul. But please don’t try to pass it off as fact. You’re making yourself look silly.

    BTW, noticeably lacking from your previous post is any data showing Paul raking in the millions Surely there must be something on discoverthenetworks you could find for me.


  4. I was just refuting your attempt to paint Paul as someone whose goal is to profit from his increased attention. And you still didn’t give me an answer!

    And how about your claim that Paul was reaching out to a “large, untapped pool of bigots”? Don’t you think the bigots would have supported Tancredo last go-around, as he was calling for a moratorium on all immigration? Paul’s only comment on immigration during the debates was that he thought immigrants were “scapegoats” for bigger problems, hardly rhetoric of a hater. And certainly you wouldn’t claim that most supporters were aware when the joined the campaign of the newsletters or some random picture with a Stormfront guy who Ron didn’t even know. Even today when that stuff is known, thanks to you guys, people are still joining the movement in droves. It’d be more accurate if you said Paul reached out to a large, untapped pool of freedom-lovers.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s