Like Redstate, I’ve received plenty of wacky Ron Paul comments. But, yesterday, it went to a new level: I got my first death threat, or something very like one. In response to a  post about Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton, I received a comment from “Brian? that begins as follows:

Someone should want to kill you for being so ignorant.  Anyone who wants to know the truth about Ron Paul …

Ironically, I’ve been trying to kick the Ron Paul habit. But, thanks to “Brian,? recidivism has once again reared its ugly head. Thus, I am compelled to comment on some recent developments in the Ron Paul phenomenon.

First, his increasing significance as an accidental facilitator of Hillarycare. Today’s Washington Times has an article that outlines the effect the good doctor is having in the primaries:

Ron Paul … is shaking up the Republican presidential contest with phenomenal fundraising and the potential to convert that into enough votes to be a spoiler come January.

The best case scenario here is that he will inflict damage on legitimate candidates. The worst case scenario is that he will reprise Ross Perot’s incredibly destructive role.  Either way, Hillary Clinton and her wrong-headed health care policies benefit.

And then there’s the question of where his money comes from. As this piece by Mona Charen reports, some of it is coming from KKK types with neo-Nazi sentiments:

Ron Paul is the favorite candidate of a number of racist, neo-Nazi and conspiracist websites … He received $500 from Don Black, the proprietor of and former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. He has not yet returned it.  

So, I feel compelled to reiterate my belief that Ron Paul is a wackjob and that many of his supporters are crazier still. The good doctor’s increasing prominence in the media, combined with his fundraising success, is a sad comment on the state of our politics.

Comments 15

  1. Jeffrey Bubb wrote:

    Funny, I noticed other blogs online stating that people who support Ron Paul ought not live. I didn’t think of that as a death threat to the masses….

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 12:30 pm
  2. Curtis wrote:

    Oh I’m sorry, by the title of the article I thought maybe you’d gotten a death threat from a Ron Paul supporter. Obviously though, you didn’t. You posted an anonymous blog comment that isn’t a death threat.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 12:56 pm
  3. e wrote:

    im sorry sir, but you are the “sad comment on the state of our politics” … the racist/nazi attacks are completely baseless in describing the man himself…

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 1:00 pm
  4. John wrote:

    I don’t think its possible to be a spoiler in the primaries its a plurality vote in most states. Yea he might be a spoiler if he ran 3rd party but he isn’t doing that.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 1:07 pm
  5. Rich wrote:


    You should have known better. ;)



    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 1:44 pm
  6. Catron wrote:

    I know. I couldn’t help myself.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 2:18 pm
  7. Jim Peterson wrote:

    This is the Internet, not the MSM. On the MSM, someone who gets paid big bucks can make such easily debated statements. :-)

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 2:18 pm
  8. Jim Peterson wrote:

    For the record, a lot of military and vets who believe Operation Iraqi Freedom was necessary are for Ron Paul because of his constitutional stance.

    If Julie Annie doesn’t start giving us real Republicans the warm and fuzzies that he cares about the Constitution (and not about pleasing evangelists, pleasing anti-male feminists, killing Muslims), then there will be a 3rd Party run.

    But even then, Paul is taking an equal number of sane people out of the Democratic Party, so a third party run will be a wash.

    I wish the US had a parliamentary democracy, because Ron Paul supporters would then be the supreme powerbrokers at this very moment.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 2:33 pm
  9. Catron wrote:

    Paul is taking an equal number of sane people out of the Democratic Party.

    Nope. On election day, the Dems will all vote for Hillary. If Ron Paul runs as an Independent or Libertarian, it will have the same result as Ross Perot’s idotic campaign: a Clinton in the White House.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 2:41 pm
  10. Matt Horn wrote:

    Had to rile up the Paulbearers.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 4:27 pm
  11. Skip wrote:

    “Nope. On election day, the Dems will all vote for Hillary. If Ron Paul runs as an Independent or Libertarian, it will have the same result as Ross Perot’s idotic campaign: a Clinton in the White House.”

    How could that be any better or worse than RudyMcRompson?

    They’re all drunk on the power of the public purse. What difference does it make if it’s a cross dresser or a lesbian dyke? The American people will just be going off the cliff a little faster if it’s a Democrat vs. a Republican. The crash at the bottom feels the same.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 5:57 pm
  12. InTheory wrote:

    Go Ron Paul! Don’t vote for the lesser of two evils, go with the best.

    Here is what Ron Paul wrote in today’s Des Moines Register:

    The practice of medicine is now a government-managed system, and very few Americans are happy with it. For decades, the U.S. health-care system was the envy of the world. Not coincidentally, there was far less government involvement in medicine during that time. Good medical care is delivered when the patient and the doctor are in charge.

    Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 6:20 pm
  13. Casey wrote:

    It’s ridiculous that they are trying to make Ron Paul seem like a racist… I thought this was a health care blog. It seems you are willing to go seriously off topic to use a cliche claim against the man that was old news before it was resurrected once again for political partisanism. First off, he already denounced that, so why should he do it again? Second, Ron Paul shouldn’t have to return the $500. EVERYONE no matter what their political beliefs are should have the right to contribute money to their favorite candidate(s). To use the identification codes online to figure out who is who on political donations is a breach of liberty (and reflects statements made in Paul’s Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act). It would be hypocritical for him to go against what he has stood for. Everyone has the right to the first Amendment and that includes people with controversial racist ideas or even simple 9/11 truth investigators….

    Posted 21 Nov 2007 at 2:37 am
  14. David R. wrote:

    I agree that “Brian” is an idiot. Threatening an individual for his or her political views is at best infantile or at worst criminal. Besides, it makes it hard to win converts.
    I also think its fair to point out that just because someone supports Dr. Paul doesn’t make that person a crackpot.
    I certainly don’t agree with everything that he says but I must stress that I do agree with his stance on the Constitution as the primary instruction booklet for our Federal Government and on his fiscal stance (Look up David Walker, Comptroller General of the US).
    I did go back and research his voting and statement records for the last 8 years. He’s been very consistent and principled, even when I felt he was wrong.
    I would guess that most “Paulians” are just ready for some straight talk and honest effort. I great many people in this nation (both D and R) feel betrayed by their respective parties
    and are looking for something, or perhaps someone.
    For myself, I believe that Dr. Paul would be a good first step. We have a lot of problems in this country, many of them too vast or complex for anyone to fix in four years. But Dr. Paul is a start.

    Posted 31 Dec 2007 at 1:18 am
  15. Will Jolly wrote:

    Though I agree with most of what you write on here, I find your animosity toward Ron Paul quite puzzling. These are Daily Kos-level hit jobs.

    Posted 15 Feb 2008 at 10:34 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *