Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Make Fun Of Ron Paul And Get Fired From Your Job

Somebody emailed pretty much every staffer who works at Philadelphia Weekly except me and sent them an email about how my post about Ron Paul made Baby Jesus cry or something. (For reference, Anthony Clifton owns PW.)

What you are allowing is unprofessional. Ron Paul is a presidential candidate. I remember the day JFK was killed. I remember the day MLK was killed. I remember the day RFK was killed. I remember the day George Wallace was shot. I remember the day Ronald Reagan was shot. I remember the day Jerry Ford was almost shot. I am sure there is a Philadelphia way to deal with idiots like Daniel McQuade but in the mean time I feel terminating his position would be enough. If something happens to a Presidential Candidate, the blood will be on your hands and I will point out to the media you had the chance to take the article down or change it and ANTHONY CLIFTON chose not to.

Apparently, telling jokes about and linking to a report about Ron Paul possibly being assassinated by a pot of neo-conservatives is a horrible capital offense or something and I should be fired. And maybe be killed, too? I dunno. Hooray for the Internet!

Posted by D-Mac on December 26, 2007 05:10 PM


No wonder the Paulbots always ask any non-cult member "who do you work for" - they will try to get you fired. Talk about freedom and liberty.

These folks are unhinged and dangerous.


Ivory Bill Woodpecker said...

Off topic, but belated Merry Christmas to all. Mine wasn't so merry: a damned stomach microbe showed up to play Grinch and I stayed home alone for fear of infecting the family. Bah humbug to the microscopic parasites! I fart in their general direction! Their mothers were all hamsters, and their fathers smelt of elderberries! Now go away, unicellu-LAIR trouble-may-CARES, or I will taunt you a sec-AWNN time!

capt said...



Sorry to hear you are not feeling well.

Maybe a large dose of poison in the form of alcoholic beverages will help?

Get well soon my friend.

Gerald said...

As more information surfaces on Ron Paul, he would not be good for America. Keep a close eye on articles that really tell us who Ron Paul is.

Gerald said...

Top Ten Myths about Iraq 2007

Gerald said...

The Christian Right Is Anti-America

Gerald said...

We Are All Prisoners Now

Gerald said...

How to Erode and Destroy Democracy

Gerald said...

How can you make a war on terror if war itself is terrorism?
– Howard Zinn

Gerald said...

Polish Troops Face War Crimes. Will American Troops Be Next?

Gerald said...

This Is War

Gerald said...

The This Is War pictures should make American security and soccer moms happy that there are no pictures of their children. They rejoice in the sight of carnage to other human beings.

Joe Mama said...

Nationally recognized pollster John Zogby sez:
Ron Paul: He's going to do better than anyone expects.
Look to Paul to climb into the double-digits in Iowa. Why? He's different, he stands out. He's against the war and
he has the one in four Republicans who oppose the war all to himself. Libertarianism is hot, especially among free-market Republicans and 20-somethings. And he's an appealing sort of father figure. He's his own brand. All he needs to do is beat a couple of big names in Iowa, then New Hampshire is friendlier territory.
After all, the state motto is "Live Free or Die."

Liberty: The Wave of the Future, ladies & germs.
I know it scares some of you, but it'd be best to get used to the concept now.

capt said...

"he's an appealing sort of father figure."

So was Bush and so was Hitler. Are you ceretain you have thought this through?

Ron Paul is associated with Stormfront, white power, he is anti-choice, anti-gay and a kook - but that is all I knew of him before he ran for president in '88.

Good thing he will never break 20% nationally.

Or are you one of the cult members that truly believe Ron Paul will win?If so are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

I will post a confirmation of a $50 contribution to any charity (non-political) if Ron Paul wins if you are as willing to do the same if he doesn't?

Kind of a dare to put up or . . .

Joe Mama said...

You were dared once before to put up, with 1,000:1 odds, since, taking you at your oft-repeated word, you're dead certain 'it's never gonna happen'.

You never responded, so I guess you opted for the alternative to putting up.

Anyway, the New York Times had the intellectual honesty to post a retraction to the 'racist' smear of Dr. Paul they published, given that it was unsupported and unsupportable.

You might learn something from that, but I doubt you will.

If you don't like Zogby's predictions and observations, then go explain to him why he's getting it all wrong about Ron Paul, and you've got it all right.

capt said...

"You were dared once before to put up, with 1,000:1 odds"

Where and when - I must have missed that one - who are you and what do you mean?

capt said...

I don't know why I even bother but:

Primary 2008, Part II: The Republicans: In Search of a Front Runner

Ron Paul: He's going to do better than anyone expects. Look to Paul to climb into the double-digits in Iowa.


"doing better" and "double digits" means even Zogby KNOWS Ron Paul the racist homophobe WILL NOT WIN.

So I guess Zogby and I are in perfect harmony - just the kooky Paulbots that never touch base with reality.

Next time bring your A game or don't expect a reply.


Joe Mama said...

Actually, you were dared to offer 100,000:1, (my memory is good, but not perfect). And gee..., it happened right here, in one of your previous anti-Ron Paul tirades:

You didn't rise to the challenge, even though, if you really, honestly, deep down believe what you are so eager to repeat (absolutely, positively zero possibility), offering huge odds should be meaningless to you.

Zogby says "double digits" speaking specifically about Iowa. You keep using a blanket term "win". Do you mean Iowa, the Republican nomination, or the presidency?
You should be specific when making predictions and encouraging betting based on them.
Zogby also says "Doing better than anyone expects", talking about Iowa, and that New Hampshire figures to be even better for him.

Stop editing out the parts that don't play into your argument.
It just looks petty and deceitful.

For the most part, Zogby hasn't gone so far as to try and predict who will or will not win the nomination this early on, with the exception of counting out Tancredo, Hunter & Keyes.
He's a professional. HE's not ruling out Ron Paul, so I guess you and Zogby aren't exactly in perfect harmony...
[OOPS! Another unpleasant, sticky fact to deal with!]
You could learn something from him, but that seems about as likely as you learning from the experience of the New York Times I pointed you to earlier.

capt said...

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama would defeat all five of the top Republicans in prospective general election contests, performing better than either of his two top rivals, a new Zogby telephone poll shows.

Yep, Zogby is right on for sure. Tnat would be Obama winning not Paul or did I miss something?

You really think Zogby has predicted a Ron Paul win? How 'bout a link or do you make claims not supported by facts.

Can you provide a link to anything you post?

Which handle were you using when you offered those odds? I can't find anything like you say you posted? Did you post that here or are you just making stuff up?

The NTY's retracted the story about White, not the fact that Black and Stormfront gave $500 to Ron. I never posted on the statement from White - although I am sure there is more to it.

If you want to keep your "facts" straight I am always willing to assist.