Do one photo essay about Ron Paul and, man oh man, how the weirdness comes out.
about my Ron Paul posts. So much so there is a forum he created to 'expose me' or something.
Since I just found this out, I headed on over to see what I could see. I have to say, I'm pretty impressed by what they had to say. And by impressed I mean I'm LMAO and crying right now!
Take a look at this from the first entry on the forum, written by my compatriot here at Townhall:
, our Townhall online community manager. I had no idea my post was going to go up in the Features section. I am flatterd and honored. I have read many a blog post from this area and I count myself lucky. Thanks, Townhall. Oh, and I thanked Josue because of his post on how to post photos to your Townhall blog. He had the tip on Photobucket and it worked. Thanks again Josue.
Yep, us RP haters are "ganging up". Of course the fact that we aren't and two of the three critiques he sites are from my blog only gives me more credit than I'm worthy of. And just a quick note: I thought RP's were all about freedom and individuality, yet one of them writes stuff like this: "I suggest we present our comments in one collective " Collective? Hello, Borg Queen, Hello!
I like the last sentence above: not too bad for a neo-con (my first label -he, he) and that he hasn't read my post carefully. Yet he besmirches it in the very next sentence - "had a history of trying to be so reasonable." This just shows he can't read anything even remotly critical of RP or his supporters without the shields going up. And I'm the one who is biased.
It is true I have written many critiques of RP in my blog. I have tried to debate Ron Paul supporters in the comments section and through my e-mail. I have blogged about all of this.
But after reading the comments over at Ron Paul Forums.com maybe i have been wasting my time. I don't mean to stop, but come on!
I am going to post one entire echange from just one commenter. It was pretty good. After you read it and if you've read my post, who do you believe is the more open minded, objective, unbiased and fair: (I hope you can follow this ok) The post is by a person called bygone.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley 
I have been especially critical of his maybe unintended support of 9/11 'Trutherism'.
This is blatantly false
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
I don't agree with his stance on foreign policy (the whole isolationist vs. non-interventionist semantics) and how Mr. Pauls support by some 'kook fringers' is the reason he is looked at in the way he is.
He's not wrong that this is a problem. It's more than semantics, but that must be made clear, and it better be done soon. It's also about as objective and unbiased as it is fair and balanced.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
I also don't agree with his stance on drug legalization, nor to I support his policy on Iraq withdrawal.
Linking these two topics is not an accident. However, you're either for or against these things and that's that.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
I was pleasantly surprised by the lack of overt kookiness at the rally. There were no 'truthers', drug legalizers or what would be considered outright nutrootery in evidence out in the open as has been observed at other Paul venues. There may be several reasons for this:
1. Downtown San Antonio on a Saturday is chock full of active duty AF personnel. Having graduated basic military training the day before, they are given a "town pass" and a lot of them spend their day downtown. In addition to that, the other presence of retired and other active duty personnel in SA on the weekends would make for a volatile situation to say the least with anti-war loons and truthers in active presentation.
2. The rally was held literally across the street from the Alamo grounds. Now as a native Texan and one who believes in his heart in the ideals fought for by the Alamo defenders, this ground is hallowed and sacred. I know it has been corrupted as a tourist trap, but to someone like me, I would have been arrested before I would let such ground be desecrated by unhonorable scumbags.
3. It's Texas! The state, by and large is pretty conservative and again SA is a pretty pro military town, so the type of nutroot nonsense at other Paul venues would not have been tolerated, even by the general public.
More linking of topics, intentionally, with a dash of patriotism and marginalizing issues that are not important to the author. Poor writing that barely qualifies as propaganda.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
Paul volunteers were also doing a pretty good job of 'policing' the crowd as well.
For his first visit to a political event, he seems to be pretty sure of himself.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
Allright, enough of that. Lets get to the details:
Originally, I was informed by a commenter that Mr. Paul would be in town for a dinner. Further investigation revealed a cost element I wasn't willing to partake in. I figured, dang, that's that. That was Friday night.
About 1100 on Saturday morning, I did a google search on Paul activities figuring maybe there would be other stuff going on besides the dinner. I was right. I learned there would be a public rally and press conference, all free beginning at 1200 and running until 1800. I figured this was what I was looking for so I rounded up my wife and youngest daughter and headed off downtown.
1400:
We found the Paul 'headquarters, as seen in these photos:
Pretty dead as you can see. But my wife, daughter and I ventured forth to see what we could see:
An obvious drug legalization sign. But this was the only one we saw through the entire afternoon, which I thought was good..
This is news? What is interesting here is that this event in Texas is dead. That can't be good.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
My daughter thought this was a clever sign.
Inside the Cavalry Museum (Paul's Rally Headquarters) we had a PC playing you tube video of Mr. Paul.
I didn't understand this sign at first. I can only surmise it's message is to support Paul since he votes no on a lot of stuff.
Wife my gathered some campaign material, some which only campaign volunteers had access too (God bless my wife). We spoke with some of the volunteers, asking when things would start up, etc, Just some general chit-chat The only obvious 'nutrootery' going on at this time was they had a recording of what I'll call 'conspiracy radio' talking about the anthrax vaccine. Seems the broadcasters were touting the negatives of it and stated: "We know the Generals will never take this stuff. They just make the 'expendable soldiers take it." and other such wackiness. This is patently false as I've witnessed firsthand. Music or anything else would have been a much better way to entice people in off the street.
I take it that the author is a "decider" when it comes to what is "nutrootery". The fact that people are free to say what they want to say should tell you something about the difference between this candidate and many others.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
At this point it was about 1430. It was hot and muggy. We decided to head inside for some chow and check back on the goings on around 1530. Se we did.
The obligatory "Me in front of the Alamo" pic. Obviously with a giant distended belly full of Mexican food and a few 'beverages'. Seriously, I never tire of this sight and love walking the Alamo grounds.
1525: Still dead. They did take my advice and put some music on. This guy played a great acoustic guitar. Too bad there wasn't really anyone there to hear it.
Due to lack of action at the Ron Paul camp, we decided to take part in the Houston St. Festival which was also going on in SA.
This wouldn't have anything to do with that lack of action, though?
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
Couple of pics of the Alamo Defenders Memorial - Awesome!
Street performer. Not too bad. In the background is the Buckhorn Saloon where Mr. Pauls fundraising dinner was held later that night.
1700: After partaking in the street festivities, we head back to the Paul camp. Crowd has begun to show. Again not much kookiness on display, which was nice. But there was some:
Band at play...
Crowds forming. Dreadlock boy was talking up a 'connection' on the phone. I kid you not.
Pretty much self-explanatory...
That this article isn't fit to be read.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
Probably the best case of overt weirdness.
Yay Overt Wierdness! We found some! And we weren't even looking for it!
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
Obvious Guy Fawkes fans, Bexar County Ron Paul volunteers, and a Code Pinker all rolled into one. In case your wondering, I asked just to be sure he wasn't just wearing a pink shirt. In my notes I wrote: "V for Vendetta? WTF?" then the reference clicked. Duh.
It was now about 1710 with 200-300 people al told.
1712: Ron Paul arrives...
My wife was snapping the picks at this time. I was taking notes. Yep, we were that close, which even though I don't support the guy, was kinda cool. Being so close to a Presidential candidate and all...
He began his speech talking about living in San Antonio back in the 60's and how the Vietnam era impacted his life. He spoke about non-interventionism and tied it all into war and how we need to stop the war and actually talked as if there was a draft right now. I thought that was odd..."We don't need the draft right now." were his words. He spoke how he is determined to stop the Iraq war now, (no mention of Afghanistan at all in his remarks BTW). And tied it all together into the economic impact of the war, how do we pay for the war, the Federal Reserve system getting rid of the IRS and taxes.
Not a bad speech as far as it goes, but no real mention of specifics. It was what I would think a standard 'stump' speech would be.
LMAO. Go to a few other events please. I do think that RP could clarify some of the issues better. You can't expect everyone to read 200 page books about things, you gotta break it down into easily digestible and regurgitatable (is that a word, lol?) form.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
A lot of the problems he's talked about caused me to think, "This guy has been in Congress for twenty years, yet we still have these problems." I know he's only one guy, but this waxed a little to liberal for me. If you are speaking against a system which is as broke as you say it is, how do you justify being part of that system for so long without having fixed it?
This author either needs to think a little more or a lot less.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
I did like his few quick remarks on the 2nd amendment though - kudos.
Yeehaw! Bang Bang!
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
He also spoke about the spontaneity of the internet and the effect younger people are having on his campaign as a result. This is something the other Republicans may want to take note of before dismissing the You Tube 'debates'. Just a thought.
I wonder what the guy behind Mr. Paul here is thinking? What part of his platform does he support? Yeah, I went there.
The Code Pinkers appear! Notice the sign at the left. My wife double checked, just to be sure. At least they weren't vocal.
Crowd listening to the 'stump'
Paul finishes speech. No Q&A here. We move onto the press conference location.
The obligatory "fist in the air". Also, the guy holding the banner on the right was probably the most annoying moron at this event. Once the rally began moving towards the press conference location, he would not shut up about, "Who's gonna end the Iraq War?" over and over and over.
And why in the world would he do that? It's not an important issue. (sarcasm)
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
Right in front with the media. Fielding more or less softball questions about leaving Iraq. "Staying will just cause more chaos, more Americans are going to die. We need to go." direct quote.
Was asked a nutball question about his policy of using depleted uranium in Iraq. Asked about Darfur. Stated, "It is chaos. But we need to do more than just drop in food. We use food as a weapon.", but offered no substantive response beyond that.
Weak. RP needs to work on this.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
One thing also he was very happy about how we get along with Vietnam now, "We get along so much better nowadays with Vietnam. Trade and everything else. We don't intervene and we get along so much better." - direct quote.
Leaving the press conference and heading off to the fundraising dinner.
Well, that's it.
I can say that nothing he said changed my mind in not supporting the guy. I've stated my reasons. But the fact that there was very little overt nutroot weirdness at this rally made me feel good. Honest supporters of Ron Paul hopefully can start getting beyond the 'kooks' who began to undermine his message.
Even though we tried really hard to portray it that way in this article.
Originally Posted by Douglass Bartley
I've given what I hope my critics would see as a fair appraisal of Mr. Paul I tried to go in as open minded as possible and to be as unbiased as possible. Now, if nothing else, you can't fault me for giving your guy a listen in person and hearing his viewpoint literally face to face.
Those of you who are Ron Paul supporters who are honest brokers in his ideas need to do the same if given the opportunity to see other candidates other than Ron Paul. At least except your own challenge as I did. It won't hurt anything. Go in as I did and try to be open minded, if for no other reason than to cement your own opinions about your guy.
I've always said I was open to both sides of the story, but wasn't given the benefit of the doubt by most. Now, you can't complain. Take your own advice.
As a side note, this was a good time my wife, daughter and I had. It was especially good for my daughter. It exposed her to political viewpoints free of weirdness (mostly) and din an up close and personal way. She asked many questions about America's political process. It was not only a learning experience, but a good time for our family.
This is the best part of the article. It's somewhat honest, but if he expected me to get the impression that he went there with an open mind he failed.
This article fails with an F.
There you go. I know that was long, but I wanted to get it all in there.
I could go in for the line by line refutation, but why bother?
I will say a few things though. I am not a journalist. I was critiqued by another poster to that forum for my lack of journalistic something: "Nothing says serious journalism like calling someone an annoying moron."
Well let me say it again, I'm not a journalist moron! I never said I was nor intinmated such in my blog. Read my stuff. I am indeed no journalist.
Yes it was my first political rally and I am pretty confident in myself. I'm confident to take a challenge issued in good faith and do the best I thought I could do for the sake of the free exchange of ideas. What did you do? Tried to be bitingly sarcastic about just some guy writing a blog post and making fun of my poor writing skills. Wow.
A post chock full of everything I've been accused of doing.
I went to the RP rally and had every opportunity to yell loaded questions at your man and try to call him out to make a mockery and circus of his events. But I didn't. If you've actually read the post, you saw the pictures, I was definately close enough. I could hav ethen cried foul as Paulbots do when the ambush political candidates.
I have more respect for the political process. And I also am very patriotic thank you very much. I've bled for my country and have served her honorably since before Mr. Paul went to Congress. I throw that in there since my firsthand experience with military affairs in SA is apparently beyond this persons ability to discern.
But you Paulbots are entitled to your opinion. Go ahead and keep turning your accusing eye at me, for who am I? No one in particular, just a guy with an opinion.
And to close this post, I am humbled to be considered in the same boat as the names listed below (amongst others), all of us BSR's:
Why do you bother with Townhall?
The main writers there - Hugh Hewitt, Dean Barnett, Mary Ham, and Patrick Ruffini - all think Ron Paul is a kook.
All of the editorial writers, with the exception of Williams and Buchanan, think Ron Paul is a kook.
IMHO, the main writers and most of the bloggers/posters over there are serious BSRs (Brown Shirt Republicans). Trying to talk with them is a waste of time.
Maybe if they could turn their eyes inward, they would think I were the one wasting my time engaging that type of derision.