The dust settling on Iowa

August 12, 2007

  As the dust settles on  Ames, Iowa, Mitt Romney began making excuses, and embellishing on the impact his win would have.  Yes, it was hot, but heat never stopped a true believer from exercising his right to vote.  Yes, a few of the top contenders weren’t their, but that also was an irrelevent point.   I think what the perfectly capped, coiffed and smiling Mitt Romney was actually thinking was “why did I spend so much money here?  I’m still in fourth, and one of the guys ahead of me isn’t even running yet.”

   The turnout was atrocious.  8,000 less attendees than 8 years ago, and almost 10,000 less voters.  Mitt Romney, in search of good things to say came up with I received more votes than George Bush did last time he was here.  Yes, Mitt…good move…compare yourself to George Bush.   Get that visual working in peoples minds.  The fact remains if republicans stay mired in the malaise created by angst over the Bush administration, the democrats are going to experience a landslide not seen since Tricky dick kicked the crap out of George McGovern. 

    The big winner here was probably Mike Huckabee.  He attracted over 18% of the vote, and 3% more than Brownback.  Sam has to be contemplating quitting even though he says he won’t.  Mike on the other hand has the only real “mo” coming out of Iowa.  He looks more electable to the christian coalition, and he is likely to attract Brownback supporters even before Brownback cries “nuff.”

   Another huge winner has to be Fred Thompson.  The field has never looked weaker and he will announce in September.  All he needs is a common sense approach to the war on terror and the mission in Iraq and I believe you’ll have your future nominee.  The fact is McCain and Giuliani didn’t attend as Mitt correctly stated, because they were going to lose.  Where he was wrong is that it was because he is so strong.  The fact is he is incredibly weak.  Just like everyone else.  Again, look at the turnout.  Don’t spin it like Mitt has, look at it.  thats what is really going on for the right.  They act like they’ve already lost.

   Who can actually sway those voters not already firmly entrenched in the muck that is the Republican base?  wait for it….Ron Paul.  He at least espouses common sense values in regards to everyday life, and hasn’t come off as an extreme Republican retard.  As the other dogs pick over the meat remaining on the bone of ultraconservatism he has a golden opportunity to soften his message, and attract the center.  He already knows those parts of his agenda that he has no chance of forwarding if elected, so he needs to trim his already meager message down even further. 

    By the time the caucases are held in Iowa in late december or extremely early January, it will have all sorted out.  The Republicans have 5 basic options right now.  I’ve added what I think honest campaign slogans would be

Mitt Romney:  If I’m not a Mormon Running for president, what am I?  George Bush Light?

Rudy Giuliani:   I’ll be whatever you want me to be.  As long as you don’t forget I’m the real hero of 9/11.

Mike Huckabee:  Genghis Khan was a left wing nutjob, and I’m living proof of that.

Fred Thompson:  I’ll get in as soon as they are done teaching me how to be Ronald Reagan.

Ron Paul:  There is no way I should lose to these idiots.

    I could live with a Fred Thompson /Ron Paul ticket.  Nothing else up there is one degree of change from what we already have. 


Iowa Straw Poll: Winners and Losers

August 12, 2007

  Well, the numbers are in, and it was an underwhelming event for a lot of people.  I’m going to make everyone happy, and everyone mad with this one. 

winner: Mitt Romney.  He took over 31% of the vote in an 11 horse race. Obviously the front runner.

Loser:    Mitt Romney…right…Giuliani and McCain had withdrawn,  and Fred Thompson isn’t in yet.  He took 31% against a field thinner than last Years Preakness.

Winner:  Ron Paul took 9.1% of the vote.  This wasn’t a New Hampshire picnic poll.  This was the IOWA STRAW POLL. This is a campaign that is probably running somewhere between stoked And euphoric right now.  His wife is going to be ok, so Dr. Ron ad a real good day.  Congrats Pauliacs.

Loser: Ron Paul.  Holy cripes, what are you thinking.  He finished behind “I’m one nut shy of being a fruitcake Tom Tancredo,” two jokers bucking for televangelist status,  and Mormon Mitt, “friend to big business, politics as usual, but I look great in this suit” Mitt.  This isn’t half as impressive as a three legged cow that can jump rope.This was about as damning a shot across the bow of the Ron Paul no organizational skills whatever campaign juggernaut.  To many buffoons talking about stealing bus rides, and diebold voting machines, and not staying on message.

Winner:  Mike Huckabee pulled over 18 percent with a serious conservative christian platform.  He can obviously inspire the base, and he beat Brownback.  This was a two horse race for Mike, and he beat the horse he had to beat.  He’ll be around for awhile.

Loser:  Mike Huckabee.  He can convince the base, but the far right base is smaller than squirrel testicles.  This guy couldn’t beat larry Flynt in a race for the white House.

Winner: Sam Brownback  His wife loves him, jesus loves him, and he probably has a dog that loves him.

Loser: Sam brownback.  This is horror story stuff.  Turn out the lights when you follow the rest of ’em out the door.

Winner: Tom Tancredo 4th…you’re kidding right.  Great job getting out the vote Tom.

Loser:  Tom Tancredo took 13.1% of the vote.  There are a lot of whacko’s in Iowa.    The guy belongs in a straitjacket and should seriously consider some electroshock therapy.  13.1?  thats just incredible.  Are there really that many deaf, mute blind people in Iowa?  Who knew.

The Field:  By guys…go home, have sex, get fat and contemplate how it feels to be beaten in the most mediocre field of candidates the Republican Party has ever fielded.

Republican party:  Wow, did you get a poor turnout.  you wanted 38,000, claim 30,000, and had about 14,000 vote.  Niiiiiiiiice.  Would you like to concede now or should we have the Democratic candidates tie their frontal lobes behind their backs for the rest of this  trouncing?


Ron Paul (dissed) by Christian Science Monitor

August 10, 2007

  No, I’m not jealous.  From time to time I may lay into Ron Paul a bit I confess.  It’s usually aimed more at the backers, and not the bright ones, which there are a host…..a plethora, a veritable cornucopia of.  This isn’t even a frontal assault, but rather a little bit of clever denigration.

    In their article Iowa GOP Straw Poll all things seem normal enough.  They talk about the absence of two of the big three, the importance to the second tier candidates mentioning several.  They say how important it is for Mitt Romney to win big, and they talk about Fred Thompson who isn’t even a candidate yet. but not Ron Paul, by name. This is all normal.

then they run down the list of those who need to do well or they will be droppping out.  Tommy Thompson, Mike Huckabee, et al.  No mention of Ron Paul. 

wait here he is…last two paragraphs of the article…AFTER the guys that are already being eulogized.

Seems a bit catty to me.


Ron Pauls base revisitied

August 9, 2007

    I keep reading these articles that tell me how many groups with how many members Ron Paul’s Grassroots campaign has.  They are fairly formidable when you think about it.  Trying to get from 20,000 to 30,000 people to voluntarily get together to do anything usually requires a major sporting event or an attack on a third world country.  The problem is, that no matter how you slice it, they are running out of time.

    6 months.  In 6 months who vs. who will be decided.  By the middle of February it will all be over but the crying for the rest of the candidates, and I fear, Dr. Paul.  He has a rabid online fan base, but they aren’t reaching beyonf their own inner circle.  Bottom line, if you don’t want to read about Ron you don’t have to because his base isn’t making any concerted effort to change the hearts and minds so to speak.  They talk to each other a lot, and they go slam ant-paulers, but they aren’t doing anything to reach that 98% of the voters that just are not interested in the Ron Paul movement.

   Whether this is a part of the natural individualist nature of people who would support a small government libertarian, or simply because the internet isn’t a great way to create political change isn’t apparent to me. What is apparent is that Ron is simply going to run out of time.  His ideals are to big for most people to wrap their minds around.  Small government sounds good until you see a bridge collapse in Minnesota, or until you have to decide that being a loser in a war we should win isn’t so bad.  American’s do not like to lose, and while their is a vocal minority screaming to get out of Iraq, far more people would like to see us win and get out of Iraq.

    Without a concerted effort by his base to change their approach to the issue of spreading the word about Ron Paul he has no chance.  You can spam every internet poll from now until doomsday, and he will still be a minor congressman from Texas.   Use your voice.  I’m not a supporter, but just by talking to people I see how easy it is to get them to at least contemplate the idea of small government.  To ponder the idea of an America that doesn’t spread its message through gunboat diplomacy.  Change is not unwelcome, but with the media steadfastly sticking to it’s “he’s not a legitimate candidate” rhetoric, his followers need to make the adjustment.  They aren’t, and by the time they do, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, or Rudy will be challenging Hillary for the presidency of the United States.  Wake up Pauliacs.  You are running out of time.  Quit waiting for that big win to change things, when what is needed is hard work and communication.


Ron Paul Rising and other news

August 9, 2007

  I’ve been wondering around checking out The Ron Paul reaction.  What I’m not seeing is anyone saying he has no hope anymore.  The word longshot comes up a lot, but in the National journals poll he has risen to 6th, and if anyone really believes that Sam Brownback has a better shot of winning this thing than Ron Paul, they must have strong Christian Coalition connections.  He still has that 2% albatross around his neck, and he doesn’t get considered in any of the big polls.

woohoo…the Oprah marriage questionnaire….you can tell around 12 or so they said, hey this is all about money…lets add something about kids and friends so they don’t think we’re republicans.

Diet foods are making our kids fat says this study.  I say bo-lo-nee.  X-Box, nintendo, television, and laziness is what makes kids fat.  Don’t believe me? hoist that behemoth off the couch and pry the joystick from his hand.  Put him to work and see if he don’t shape up.

Well, this makes sense.  The only thing better than 12 million illegal immigrants, is 12 million unemployed illegal immigrants

The nice thing about politicians being honest, is it shows us how stupid they are.  While I agree with the theory that no one should join the military if they don’t wish, saying that his children are helping America by trying to get him elected might well be the dumbest thing Mitt has said all week.  This of course leaves him far behind Barack “dubya” Obama.

This is a great article.  60 years since Great Britain unceremoniously succumbed to the demands of Mahatma Gandhi and left India, the strife continues.  Pakistan and India…kind of a larger israel/palestinian thing.  Weren’t the Brits involved there as well.  We talk partitioning in Iraq.  Read this if you think its a good idea.

evolution has changed its story again.  Thats the beauty of science.  It just changes things as it goes along.  More skuls, more indecision.  Evolution is correct, the tree just has more branches than we thought.  Not in kentucky it doesn’t


The YouRtubes debates, revisited

July 28, 2007

    So the new hue and cry is the Republican candidates are scared to debate on YouTube.  I for one do not blame them.  I think from a strategic standpoint those candidates currently refusing to attend the debate do so with a level of acute awareness often missing in the politicians of today.

   Before the debate has even started Mitt Romney is being accused of saying that he thinks it’s undifnified to be questioned by the general public.  The fact that he said nothing close to this is irrelevant because YouTubes have a huge problem with reading comprehension, and think that cesspool the other night was a fine example of democracy at work.  What he said was he thought (I paraphrase) the office of president should be held to a higher level than to have to be asked questions by a snowman.  I concur.  Ratings are important to CNN, and since it is their editors that chose the questions we have to assume that ratings came into play when choosing the snowman question.  I’m quite sure one of the other 3000 questions could have addressed global warming just as well.  Some level of decorum should be maintained, and lets face it, the global warming snowman was as much about ratings as the psychopath with the assault rifle.

   Additionally, the benchmarks in Iraq debate will be in full roar in September, and this is almost certainly the reason those not electing to attend have chosen that course of action.  Contrary to what this mullet has to say:

Added state Republican spokeswoman Erin VanSickle: “It’s an important debate in an important battleground state that just moved its primary to Jan. 29th. In other words, we have every confidence that they will attend. They can’t afford not to.” (same link as above). 

While I’m sure Florida will be important, it always is, I don’t think being swamped with questions about their Iraq positions will be good for any of the candidates.  McCain has chosen to attend, as has Ron Paul.  McCain needs a metaphoric homerun to win, and Ron Paul is on the right side of the war issue.  Hard to blame either of them.  The rest are not desperate enough to go to Florida and be sandbagged by CNN.

   It’s not about you tube, although the wretchedly insipid crowd hanging out in the political arena there are absolutely sure there voice is the only one that matters.  What matters is that several little CNN gnomes will be picking and choosing the questions, and quite likely stuffing the clip box as they do so.  It’s not hard to imagine some little editor having a buddy send in a sleeper clip that they can smear a Republican candidate with.  How about in the interest of fairness we have a FOXNEWS/YouTube.com debate? 

    I’m not raising a conspiracy theory here.  CNN has long been known for its softballing interviews with democratic leaders while hammering away at conservatives.  It’s easy to se it happen when you think both liberals and conservatives are worng, but I may be the only person left that believes that. The debate for the democrats barely touched on Iraq because quite simply thats not news at a democratic debate.  They all profess desire to be out of the war, and everyone knows they aren’t doing anything about it.  The republicans on the other hand primarily support some form of presence in Iraq, and I would surmise that based on the timing of the debate, CNN has every intention of using the benckmarks as a club to wield at the candidates.

    Smart move Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, et al.  No point putting your head in a noose today in hopes of being reincarnated in time for the elections.


not really newsworthy

July 23, 2007

   Lets start with tonights debate.  The spin machine is pumping out what a new and different thing the You Tube debate will be.  Ok, tell me how?  Because “you” are asking the questions.  Lets look at that.  Over 2000 clips have been submitted according to CNN.  Obviously, they don’t have time in two hours to ask 2000 questions.  How do we pare it down?  Well, lets have CNN’s editors do it.  Out of 2000 maybe 30 will be used.  It’s not much of a stretch to imagine that the 30 will be those that CNN wants asked.  The only input you have is whether you wear a silly hat, or hold your stupid fleabitten cat while you ask it.  This is the first debate sanctioned by The Democratic National Committee this election cycle.  What to expect?  I think John Edwards and Barack Obama have to be more aggressive.  Edwards because if he doesn’t he is dead, and Barack just to show that he is capable of it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20070723/tc_nf/54047

   I wonder which $2000 suit wearing reject allowed the Republican debate to be held in September?  Seems to me something real serious is going down in terms of Iraq that month, and it is likely to turn the Republican debate into a free for all.  Which is good for the viewers, and for Ron Paul, but it sandbags the hell out of the hawks on stage.  If I we’re Giuliani, McCain, and Romney I’d be mad as hell.  Why?  Well, do you think much is going to change in the next month and a half in Iraq?  Yeah, me either.  The Republican governors say its no big deal that their isn’t a front runner.  They may be right.  Conservatives are notoriously tight with their campaign funding until it shakes out, meaning they’ll be lots of money for the stretch run, and the geneal election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070723/ap_on_el_pr/republican_governors_2;_ylt=Ag.2ypj8XxumGruFLpERpQgL1vAI

   Have you paid your “support dead farmers” tax?  In a 7 year period over $1.1 billion in subsidies was paid to dead farmers.  The U.S. Department of Agriculture pays out over 40% of claims without any review process at all.  In most cases they rely on the farm corporations to inform them of a death.  They say staff shortages and competing priorities are to blame.  Another government agency tossing your money out the window, and generally to people one hell of a lot richer than you.   Don’t believe me? Read the article.  They’re spending money you could be putting away for your childs tuition to subsidize giant farm companies worth millions.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19912382/

I was reading this and started doing the math.  .09 cents is 3%.  That means you now pay roughly $3.00 for a cup of coffee?  Oh man, you deserve to be bent over and rammed by Starbucks.  That’s pretty much the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19918485/

Obama, Osama, and Chelsea’s Momma?  Well isn’t that clever.  I can understand Mitt’s argument.  He isn’t responsible for his followers, and during photo ops you can’t really stop and check every sign.  Further, this is kinda funny.  Still, if you’re Mitt Romney, you might not want to give anyone any more reason to wonder about you.  I know the Mitt fans are going to hate that comment, but he’s on decidedly thin ice anyway, and I see no reason to hand the guy with the gun some bullets.  The Mormon vote can’t get him elected, so he might want to make sure and not alienate “others” with stupid photo op tricks.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Lil Wayne and Ja Rule got arrested Sunday night on weapons charges.  Lil Wayne also got zapped with drug charges.  I really have to know.  What is with hip hop stars these days? Do they think they’re in the NFL?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/07/23/rappers.arrested/index.html

You may not like him, But nobody packs a punch in publishing like Harry Potter.  The latest book “harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows sold 8.3 million hardcover copies in the U.S. in the first 24 hours.  That shatters the old record of 6.9 copies of…yep, The Half Blood Prince.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,290346,00.html

The worst flooding in 60 years in Great Britain.  I’m not surprised.  Al Gore has not done enough to stop Global Wetting, and now you see the consequences.  Had he not spent so much time inventing the internet this tragedy could easily have been prevented.

http://www.mail.com/newsarticle.aspx?catId=3&articleId=1147296

whoops…i bet this guy supports gay marriage now. This is pretty funny stuff. His wife got licked, and he got stuck.

http://www.mail.com/NewsArticle.aspx?catId=2&articleId=1147225&newssiteid=1


How Ron Paul can win the presidency

July 20, 2007

  I know, you think I’m joking.  I should be.  Our society should be able to see through all the pandering his disciples are doing, but I really don’t think they can. They should be able to see through the political gamesmanship the two major parties are involved in, but if people were cognizant of it then we wouldn’t be where we are today.  Here’s just a thought on how Ron Paul could win. There are a lot of hypotheticals involved, but it’s better than his “I have no chance” plan.

1.  We suffer no major terrorist attack on our soil between now and the election.  This is important because as long as there is no attack George Bush’s policies will get no credit for it.  People wouldn’t give George Bush credit for pharting if he let a loud, disgusting whopper in front of the white house press corps.  As long as there isn’t an attack the democrats and Ron Paul take the edge.  I’m not counting Fred yet, because Fred isn’t counting Fred yet.

2.  The democrats nominate Hillary Clinton.  I think this is going to happen.  I knw all the newsies are gaga over Barack right now, but it is going to become all to obvious that he hasn’t the experience necessary to win the white house. Neither does his campaign staff.  Hillary would lose the centrists, and even some of the lefties.  She isn’t all that likeable.

3.  Rudy continues to go right.  His comments about only seating strict constructionist judges does not sit well in the center, and the right wing christian conservatives are not a large enough block to get him elected.  Right wing Rudy can’t win the nomination, and this would open the door for Ron.

4.  Mitt continues to be mormon.  i know it shouldn’t matter, but we live in a very bigoted society.  If you are different we hate you or fear you, and that isn’t going to change before 2008.  I can’t see Mitt repudiating his religion, and he shouldn’t.  It’s his albatross though.  You’ve never heard a politician say “we have to get out the mormon vote.”

5.  Ron doesn’t do anything incredibly stupid.  His borderline stupid statements won’t kill him with the middle class.  They are discouraged, in debt, and watching wages decline versus inflation.  They see themselves being vut out of the American Dream by politicians that squander their resources at an alarming rate.  They watch as the rich get tax breaks, and the breaks they get don’t ever seem to make a differencei n their lives.  They are disenfranchised, and know that either party will promise them the moon, and give them more of the same.  This works for Ron because all he promises them is what they already feel is theirs.

6.  The war in Iraq continues.  Which it will.  Politicians make a lot of strategic mistakes.  The republicans are wrong to think its a winnable war.  The democrats are wrong to think they can benefit by allowing it to continue.  Ron Paul has the market cornered here, and if the two sides don’t change he will keep this ground to himself.  None of the other end the war candidates have any credibility left on the issue.

7.  Gas prices go up,  foreclosures continue to rise, and nothing is done about immigration.  The two parties should be ensuring that enforcement of current law is accomplished, and a compromise can be reached on the reform of immigration policy.

8. Instead of picking another libertarian style candidate, or a Republican to run as his vice president, he waits for Hillary to win and then chooses Barack.  Barack makes a nice addition to the team, and Ron doesn’t look so radical anymore.  Barack has to bend some for this to work, but I could see them securing enough of the left, a bunch of the right, and maybe 80% of the middle.

the key here is can Ron Paul compromise, or does he need to have it his way?  If he does he should head to burger king, because he will never win the election.


religion…the fox in the hen house

July 16, 2007

    I’m a little concerned.  Is it Romney, or is it just me?  Has religion suddenly leapt to the fore of the presidrntial race?  I guess anything is possible in a society as mixed up as ours, but can it be reasonable to elect someone based on their religious beliefs?  Pardon me while I hop up on my pulpit.

let’s start with a laymans definition of faith.  Most religions are faith based, so this is a good starting point.

Faith:  Believing in something that can’t be proven.   Pretty simple.  Not real complicated.  Would anyone like an example?

Example 1: While there is no proof that tarot cards can really tell your future, many people believe in them. 

Let’s do another

example 2: while there is no proof that their are humanoid life forms on other planets, many people believe in them.

Let’s call in the hounds and head it on home to bowlegs now.

example 3: Though there isn’t a shred of evidence that there is a supreme being, many people believe in one.

   Number one is no sillier than number two is no sillier than number three.  In fact, if you believe in any of them they aren’t silly at all. They also do not lend you a special insight into the running of a nation, any extra knowledge on how to deal with the leaders of other nations, nor do they improve your ability to make a tasty bologna, mustard, and chitlins sandwich.

Its not important.  In fact, were it up to me religion would almost always be a negative. Religious doctrine, all of them, are riddled with violence, intolerance,  and draconian strictures.  The strictures are so binding that a truly devout man would make a horrible leader.  would you like an example?  No? Tough

Example:  Jimmy Carter

Example: Adolph Hitler

Example: Golda Meir

Example: The Ayatollah Khomeini

I could go on like that until tomorrow, but we’d be no closer to the end of this post, and I’m striving for it.

  Mitt Romney is a mormon.  What did you think?  90% of the people that hear the word mormon think “polygamy.”  Those who have read up on it so they can slam him know much more.  What they don’t realize is that the same brush they use to spread the tar that holds the feathers on old Mitt, can be used on any of the others as well.

What makes a christian a good choice as a president?  If you said nothing you are correct. What happens if a true christian gets in the white house? A Ron Paul, or a Mike Huckabee? Hell, Mike is a preacher. Will they fight to end abortion?  Will they try to make adultery a felony?  Will coveting be a crime? Man I hope not because I confess I have been known to covet my ass off from time to time.  Will a catholic president out of bitterness go after the lutherans?  You laugh my friend, but it’s been done.  This nation was settled by people who were fleeing religious persecution.  If I’m not mistaken it was those two factions.

   What about Barack?  He is a christian, but his name is pure muslim. What if he’s elected, and then converts to islam?  does Shariaa law become something he wants enforced?  Shall we lop off hands for theft?  How about stoning for adultery. Maybe a little bif bam boom for not wearing your abaya when you walk out in public ladies?

What about hillary? Would opus dei try to whack her?  They seem to be all about a patriarchal society?  Or would she rewrite scripture ala Dale Brown, and raise up Mary Magdalene? 

  Back To Mitt.  Would he really make me have two wives?  I work damn hard not to have any, but I know i’m supposed to be fruitful and multiply under virtually every religion on earth.

   None of that is likely to happen.  We have what we call seperation of church and state.  It’s more of a euphemism for “incredibly rich churches don’t have to pay there fair share,” but we do have it. The point I make in my overly wordy way, is that religions are not inviting if you don’t belong to them.  They are not inclusive, are not tolerant of other ideals.  They are probably the number one cause of wars since time began.

Oh yeah.  they are based on faith.  Let’s elect the man in the moon.  There is no basis for him existing, but i have faith that he does.

Being religious is not a bad thing.  It tends to make one an instant hypocrite, but other than that it’s not so bad.  Religion is no barometer on how good a person is though, and shouldn’t be a primary concern when casting your vote.  I’d vote for the guy that worships Roscoe the wonder bunny if i think he’s the best man for the job.


Why there aren’t more anti- Ron Paul blogs

July 14, 2007

   Man, I want to make this a humor peice because so few of the pauliacs have any sense of humor, but it deserves to be handled with some degree of decorum.  I saw the above title on one of my search engine hits, and gave it a little thought.  With a brain the size of a frogs, you can’t give much more than a little thought to something without forgetting to breathe.  I started turning blue so I stopped thinking, and started typing.

   Why aren’t there?  I can come up with several reasons.  Let’s start with the one that will cause a pauliac smooch fest on my blog.  There just isn’t that much wrong with the guy.  I mean, not much that they can’t justify with that ever credible phrase “it’s not in the constitution, so I voted against it.”  It’s incredibly good cover.   There are flaws to the reasoning, and I’ve discussed them here before.  I was a little vilified for being a non believer, but i don’t believe in astrology, tarot, and George Bush either, so it bothered me not.

  Another good explanation is that the best way to bring attention to someone is to criticize them.  Ron Paul is the Mike Gravel of the republican candidates.  Did you watch Mike Gravel chew up and spit out the other democrats on the debate? they didn’t argue with him.  They folded their hands and smiled no matter how he attacked their records.  Why?  For the same reason girls ignore you guys when you walk up to them, and start talking to them in a bar.  Because if you ignore someone they may go away.  Those competing with Ron don’t want him getting noticed.  All publicity is good publicity for Ron.  Even me.

   another good bet is that the blog world appears to be either apathetic or liberal for the most part.  So, they either don’t care, or they don’t dislike him.  Ron Paul is someone the democrats think they can beat handily because they think he is about a turnip shy of a truckload.  They don’t blog against him because they don’t know he hates them.

   My last plausible cause for the lack of anti Paul blogs  is they require work.  I write about Paul maybe one post out of five on the average.  There just isn’t that much out there that you don’t have to work to find.  He only releases the feel good Ron Paul is the messiah crap on his blog, and the news organizations say as little as possible about him.  People are lazy.  You want an easy cheesy punching bag you nail Clinton or Romney.  They have plenty of history to attack, and all Ron has is his whole anti-government thing.

   Well, you can zap his followers pretty good.  Most of them appear to be thumbsuckers, and mouth breathers, with the occassional thumbsucking, mouth breathing militiamen thrown in.  Although I did meet an anti-zionist (self proclaimed) muslim who loves the guy.  His blog is at ahmed Ismael I believe…check out oldephartintraining if you want to find ahmed.