Please Ignore Ron Paul

An Open Letter to ‘Old Media’.

Sometimes I wish I understood, but could not seem to comprehend why you do it, but then minutes later I did not give a damn anymore. And that is why you will fail.

Why are you so set on who you want the presidential candidates to be? Is it that you see that the Status Quo is threatened? Is change such a bad thing? Maybe the reason doesn’t matter. In the end of each day, no matter if you are a democrat, republican, liberal, conservative, neo-con, corporate power representative, or what ever else … We are all still United States Citizens. We all care about America, right … Right? The sad truth is that we do not. Perhaps liberty is not a concern of the powerful, and If you do not care, then I can not care for you. And that is why you will fail.

For years you have force fed what you deem to be important down the throats of Americans citizens. Minimized most of what the public should be concerned about while sensationalizing the mundane and trivial. Did you do it for the all powerful dollar? The same dollar that is now worth half of what it was worth a few years ago? Even as I ask, the reason does not matter. And that is why you will fail.

I must admit that you almost had me. At one time I felt that the United States reigned supreme, the greatest, the infallible, the just. Those were happy times … so I happily ignored reality while I sort-of-listened to your newscasters tell me how it really was. Oh yes, I remember … The ‘Sold’ war. The logic, your logic, to me it made sense. it was simple really, simple enough for the average channel surfer or newspaper reader to get: To defend, we must go on the offensive. To protect ourself, we must attack them. And years later, after the reasons we went there had changed and changed again … And when there was no army left for us to fight … new reasons were given to us as to why we are still there and why we had to stay and can not leave. But, like so many others, I could flip through the channels, not feeling anything as the casualty toll rose and rose. And that is why you will fail.

If not for you, maybe I would not have ever given a damn. I do not remember exactly when, or how it happened, I can only remember the ‘why‘: Giuliani Vs. Clinton, or maybe Rommy Vs. Obama or maybe it would be McCain VS. Edwards. Flick, flick, flick, same, same, same, ‘one of these guys WILL be your candidate, we say so’. I change the channel again. I could not care less because I did not care at all. And that is why you will fail.

I must thank you for opening my eyes. You see, somewhere in the haze, something began to stand out. Every once in a while I would be trying to ignore you while waiting for the next rerun of my favorite show and you would continue to tell us who our president would be. Then you went out of your way to tell us that there was someone who has ‘No chance’ and you did not know why they were even trying. At first I dismissed it, after all, you were telling us who was ‘winning’, and you could be trusted, but the more I heard about the guy who absolutely had ‘NO CHANCE!’, this man, ‘Ron Paul would never … could never …’, the closer I began to listen. Somehow if you hear shouting for so long, it simply becomes background noise and the smallest whisper can be heard. In all of your screaming about who was winning, the only thing I picked up was the name that you said could not. And that is why you will fail.

“Google Ron Paul!” a sign said. It was somewhere on a side street in MD. I passed it as I drove home one day. Because of you, I remembered that name. I wanted to see what it was about this person that made you so sure he could not be in the running. So I went home and looked up the name. I do not even have to tell you what happened then. Almost any American that does it for themselves already knows what I’m talking about. I will never forget that it was your bias against this man that made me remember him. And that is why you will fail.

Now as I close out this letter, I imagine that for every person who looked into this so called ‘No Chance’ candidate you think to your collective selves: “So What! You are in the minority, you still have no chance! No Chance! No Chance!” I would just like to point out that our numbers (even though they continue to grow substantially), do not matter. They truly do not. Have you realized why yet? No? It’s because the average person that listens to you is exactly like I was. You tell them who you think our next president will be and they will happily sit back and accept that you know what you are talking about. On their recliners or couches, fine with the status quo, they do not think they count and they will not make an effort to vote. After all, You told them the battle has already been decided. With the exception of the ones who look in to the only person who can not win, the rest will not give a damn at all … ever. Meanwhile this minority, this revolution, it does what it does, these amazing things that have never been done before, these are the people who are out there making a change, and then there is you, continuing to do the best thing for us by ignoring Ron Paul. And that is why you will fail.

mBxiIMclI3E

Everyone else, you’re welcome to partake in the Tea Party of ’07! Thanks for reading.

274

Comments

  1. Jeff  January 21, 2008

    “Can someone muster a relatively thoughtful point of view on why this forum and so much of Ron Paul’s base seems to be so emotional and, as someone else put it, unhinged?”

    Most of the world contains people who are not as educated as you would like.
    It does not mean they won’t follow & promote a leader they are attracted to.

    Most revolutions are started by people who are unhinged & emotional.

    The fact is citizens should not be force fed ‘preferred’ candidates by the mainstream media.

    Giuliani & Thompson are all over the place in the media. Ron Paul can’t even get mentioned as a running candidate in the New York Times.

    C’mon that is a bit distasteful, even for a supposedly educated observer like yourself.

    reply
  2. Vaughn  January 21, 2008

    Really? Run a “Ron Paul” query on nytimes.com and I see a candidate profile first, an article entitled “Paul Happy With Second in Nevada,” a big candidacy profile piece from the NYTimes magazine, and at least 10 pages of article links behind that. Here, see for yourself:

    http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?query=ron+paul&srchst=nyt

    If your answer is that Paul supporters are less educated, well first let me say – golly… that’s a self-defeating position for a Paul supporter to take. What, is knowledge an obstacle to truth? Is education a plaything of the elites? Are you excusing some behavior by saying you don’t know any better? That’s either an extension of the over-zealous “us against the world” approach overreaching far enough to contradict itself or the most self-patronizing thing I’ve ever heard.

    And secondly, I don’t buy it. I don’t think you can correlate education level and self righteousness – in fact I think if you could you’d see that the opposite of your assumption is more likely to be true – that those with more education tend to believe that much more fervently and emotionally that they’re right and their opponents aren’t just wrong, they’re bad, or at best brainwashed.

    Why in your world can’t we just disagree? Where is it said that our candidates were spoon-fed to us by the mainstream media? (as if the MSM has some preference for Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, Huckabee, or to a lesser extent, McCain)

    And why, oh why, do you refuse to accept that whatever the legitimacy of his platform and its impact on the conservative movement (which could in some way be significant), Ron Paul is extremely unlikely to win the nomination, let alone spark a tea party-esque “revolution”? Why is it so honorable to believe in something that is plainly untrue? That’s not even faith – which is believing in something that can’t be proven – that’s just believing in something that’s observably false.

    I mean, if you call enough people trolls and goats, then will it be true?

    No, sir – the problem isn’t that Paul supporters aren’t as educated. Truth is, I’m not especially educated. No, the problem (to the extent that there is one) is that they aren’t L-I-S-T-E-N-I-NG.

    By the way, I’m not especially educated. I’m just listening.

    reply
  3. Vaughn  January 21, 2008

    Dammit. That last line from my last posting was a typo – which is why it sounds all repetitive and obnoxious. Sorry.

    reply
  4. Jeff  January 21, 2008

    I made no statement that Paul followers are less educated. That is your own inference….which is telling in itself.

    The New York Times should on their main poll’s page list him as a candidate in their photo lineup.

    They included candidates in that lineup that have less standing in the polls.

    It is referred to as lying by omission.

    reply
  5. Jeff  January 21, 2008

    “No, the problem (to the extent that there is one) is that they aren’t L-I-S-T-E-N-I-NG.

    By the way, I’m not especially educated. I’m just listening.”

    The problem might be….”What are you listening to ?” & then followup that with “Understanding what you heard”.

    Clinton made tons of money off of insider trading in the market & moves to New York to prepare for a Presidential run without being a former resident of New York.

    Doesnt dump popular cheating husband, so she can become president someday. Unethical.

    Obama’s beautiful new house was a freebie from the top real estate developer in the Illinois tri-state area
    & former drug user. | Unethical.

    Giuliani is a serial extramarital cheater in his personal life. Unethical.

    Why when electing a President of The United States should people set the bar so low.

    reply
  6. Jeff  January 21, 2008

    “Where is it said that our candidates were spoon-fed to us by the mainstream media? (as if the MSM has some preference for Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, Huckabee, or to a lesser extent, McCain)”

    If you ever had a way to make money in a certain fashion, wouldnt you want to protect it?

    A new dummy is as good as the old dummy. They both won’t understand what is going on.

    reply
  7. Vaughn  January 21, 2008

    I’m not going to bother splitting semantic hairs with what you implied and I inferred on the education bit. Reviewing what you wrote, I can’t see what a reasonable person could infer differently, but whatever.

    I think you’ve hit it. We’re not listening to the same things.

    You are subjectively invalidating every candidacy but Paul’s on unproven and conspiratorial grounds.

    Obama, whose politics I don’t care for at all, purchased a small plot to enlarge his property at above market rate, and then later openly regretted and apologized for doing business at all with Rezko, at least according to the Chicago Sun Times. Oh, and he tried drugs, which apparently invalidates him (and God knows what other percentage of American citizens) from running for President.

    Giuliani, according to, uh… you – is a serial philanderer, which invalidates him (and God knows what other percentage of American citizens) from running for President.

    Hillary Clinton, whose politics I don’t care for at all, stays with her cheating husband which you have determined with absolute certainty is a cynical political move and decreed from on high that all of this is unethical. Believe me, I’m no Hillary fan, and I don’t think she’d make a good President, but as to why, there are about 800 better reasons than that. Nevertheless, you believe these actions invalidate her (and God knows what other percentage of American citizens) from running for President.

    So, let’s cut to the chase and take your intensive, guilty-until-proven-innocent character test and we get to Ron Paul. Dr. Paul created some newsletters that eventually spouted paranoid, nonsensical, racist diatribes and this invalidates… nothing. No, his word that he knew not of the content in these newsletters that went out for years with his name on it – a flimsy excuse that begs further questions even if you believe it – passes your intensive, guilty-until-proven-innocent ethics test.

    Talk about cherry picking. You’re right, we’re not listening to the same things. Nor understanding what we hear.

    Believe me, it’s much easier if you just duck out now and call me a troll or tell me I’m complicit in the rape of American citizens or something.

    reply
  8. @ - Vaugn  January 29, 2008

    Sir, you are deaf, dumb, blind and asleep. Someday you will wake up…by then it will be too late.

    reply
  9. @ - Jeff  January 29, 2008

    Jeff said “I made no statement that Paul followers are less educated. That is your own inference….which is telling in itself.”

    Um, I hate to say it but you just did what you said you didn’t do. You played the game and you lost.

    reply
  10. ron paul is prolife  January 29, 2008

    To the person who said: “God Bless You my brother and for this historic revolution that we fight together for all men and women to have liberty and to be “FREE”. Thank You.”

    Ron Paul is Pro-Choice. How is that liberty for women?

    reply
  11. Vaughn  January 29, 2008

    Now I am “deaf, dumb, blind and asleep”. Worse yet, by the time I wake up it will be too late!

    Meanwhile, my point about selective, paranoid, conspiratorial, unfair criticism of every other candidate remains, unchallenged.

    Yep, par for the course!

    You know, if some of you worked just a bit to channel that rabid, existential enthusiasm into remotely even-handed debate, you might change a mind or two. Probably not, buy you might. Alternately, you could just keep screaming.

    Are we convinced Ron Paul isn’t winning the nomination yet, by the way? Have we now shifted into “he’ll win as an independent, you can’t stop this movement” mode? And where do your passions go when he’s relegated to the dustbin of history in a few months?

    reply
  12. vaughn  January 30, 2008

    bahun i hope satan rapes you and you die of aids:)

    reply
  13. Vaughn  February 2, 2008

    No, for the record, that was not the real Vaughn. Wait, was it aimed at me? I’m confused.

    reply
  14. somedude  May 6, 2008

    Umm, is this pro-Paul or anti-Paul.

    reply
  15. Vaughn  August 16, 2008

    Hi guys!

    As a Ron Paul ignorer, I was promised I would fail for reasons that were exhaustively detailed at the top of this page.

    What’s the plan on that? Do you guys know the plan for Ron Paul’s ascension to the Presidency? Cause there’s not a lot of time left, so…

    where’s the movement?

    reply
  16. littlepear  August 23, 2008

    OK. So you’re not the Vaughn I was thinking of. No, you would have to be a Vaughan. If you were, then you would be playing blues guitar for the big party after Ron Paul’s Rally for the Republic in Minnesota September 2.

    Come on up! there’ll be 10,000 of us there having a blast for several days to launch R.P.’s Campaign For Liberty PAC.

    Long after the next president has been elected and served his term, the Campaign For Liberty PAC will be going strong with thousands of Ron Pauliticians descending into local and state public offices throughout the country.

    This is a peaceful revolution. One that seeks only to regain individual liberties for all Americans.

    Come on in. The movement’s fine! http://rallyfortherepublic.com

    reply
  17. George Soros  November 1, 2008

    Good work guy!

    reply
  18. Doctor  November 1, 2008

    I’am your fan

    reply
  19. Sureincome  November 25, 2008

    “I could not care less because I did not care at all” – amazing line. I felt EXACTLY the same as this author until I discovered Ron Paul. Thank you for this article… amazingly written.

    Cheers,
    an opportunity to earn extra money

    reply
  20. Joseph M. Durnal  December 24, 2008

    Cool – you kept the Ron Paul post. I was worried that the redesign would make it go away.

    reply

Add a Comment