Ron Paul’s Revolution and Tea Party

ronpaultea.jpg

This made me grin bigger than a Cheshire Cat. Ron Paul Mob Zombies have combined the quaint notion of reliving the Boston Tea Party with rhetoric better suited for a Jihadist terrorism site. Apparently the Anarchist’s Cookbook is required reading for this bunch who daydream for real revolutionary upheaval and lace their rhetoric with the tools of war and terror to bolster their cause to get their messiah hoisted to the top spot.

I had to laugh out loud as this bunch romanticizes itself as revolutionistas in the mantle of our Founders. They think that by lacing their campaign with terroristic threatening and using keywords like “bombs”, they will attract more supporters and media attention. What they may end up with is lots of attention from Law Enforcement and national security people.

More than half of Ron Paul’s zombie mob simply support his anti-war Isolationism views and do not speak of the other issues they do not support him on (like demolishing the welfare state). There’s a faction within that mob that should raise the eyebrows, as the Anarchists and neo-Nazis at Stormfront gravitate to the Libertarian candidate running in GOP clothing for the apparent sole desire to get an actual bloodletting revolution started.

Considering the threats I, myself have received from this bunch – it’s not too much of a stretch to understand why those who want violence and blooshed are drawn like flies to the Ron Paul campaign, considering the incendiary rhetoric this bunch spews.

Ron Paul’s campaign is hardly the kind of stalwart resistance to the Intolerable Acts of King George III, having more in common with The Mad Hatter’s Tea party in Wonderland than the one the Colonists in Boston had over two centuries ago.

But they are good for a laugh – or a cry, or wonder why they riddle non-interventionism is not Isolationism when Isolationism is non-Interventionsim. Aw hell, it’s easier to figure out why a raven is like a writing desk with that bunch.

Have some more tea as this political campaign is definitely beyond the Looking Glass.

“ka-BOOOOMMM!!!”
Ron Paul Supporters’ “Campaign Terrorism”
Set to EXPLODE On December 16th in Boston!

Like shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater, or saying “Bomb!” on an airplane, incendiary keywords amplify media attention to history-making Ron Paul fund raising event.

Pssst! Let’s talk about bomb-making!

Here’s the plan: The mother of all money bombs is preparing to go off on December 16th, the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party! Hurry, it’s not too late to get on board with this history-making, explosive event! Conspire with all the other revolutionaries! Sign up today at TeaParty07.com! Spread the word! Let’s blow this campaign wide open!

Don’t let history leave you behind! Let’s mine this opportunity for all it’s worth, and nuke all the other candidates! We’ll have a blast watching the campaign go ballistic! Let’s end the confusion about who’s the leading Republican candidate, and give the media some fireworks to enjoy!

Don’t miss your chance to participate in a scene like this one, many years from now….

“Grandpaw, what was the Boston Tea Party of ’07 like, really, huh? Please tell us again, Grandpaw!”

“By cracky, great-grandchildren, I was there when the Ron Paul money bomb was dropped! Why, I helped build it! I told all my brothers and sisters, all my neighbors, the people at church, everyone at the office! The Ron Paul Blimp was flying overhead, bands were playing, why in fact, it was that very day that I got up the courage to ask Grandmaw to marry me!”

“Did you ever meet Dr. Paul? What about Paul Revere? Was Sam Adams there? Did you watch them all on TV?”… and so on and so forth….

If you want to have such fond remembrances in days to come, get out and do your part, every day for the rest of this week, in preparation for the upcoming Tea Party!🙂

Of course, right about now, the anti-terrorism task force computers at the NSA, CIA, FBI, and elsewhere are probably going into overdrive trying to make sense of all the inflammatory keywords in this column! I’ll probably be getting a visit from Homeland Security in short order! Now won’t THAT make a story for the grandkids!🙂

Copyright (c) 2007 by Dann McCreary (aka creator)

8 Comments

Filed under Politics

8 responses to “Ron Paul’s Revolution and Tea Party

  1. MMC

    I find the Ron Paul campaign to be completely different from the light in which you would cast it, using vague suggestions of unsavory co-travellers and such.
    For all your laudable providing of historical docs, it is the application of such that seems wanting.
    Mr. Paul has a laudable and crystal clear vision of what the Constution means. I don’t always agree, but you would do the world a service were you to flesh out in detail why you disagree, rather than your present tack.

    Victory

  2. invar

    MMC, it’s hardly ‘vague’ when I provided the actual link to the RP supporter’s web site with the attributed quote.

    I also have detailed essays and replies as to why I disagree with Ron Paul’s positions on this very blog.

    More than one RP supporter has attempted to proselytize to me about the perfection of RP’s foreign policy position compared to my disagreements with it are.

    In those discussions and arguments are key reasons, in detail about why Ron Paul is on my OPPOSE list for 2008.

  3. Cary

    Ron Paul has NO CLUE what the constitution means.

    In the Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court case, a new outrage was quietly foisted on Americans: it was the first time EVER that UN and EU law was cited as a precedent. Outrageous. See: http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/idaho/ideditorials02.htm .

    In Ron Paul’s commentary on that case, he offers absolutely NO objection to using UN/EU legal precedent. In fact, his only complaint is that the US Supreme Court interpreted the 14th Amendment to trump Texas law. A bogus argument to begin with! In Ron Paul’s mind, states ought to trump even the Constitution! See here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html

    He’s absolutely no constitutionalist, and is very much a chameleon , and a really a dangerous nutjob.

  4. Cary

    The Constitution says:
    War Powers
    While the President is the Commander in Chief, Congress holds the power to declare war, to raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a navy, and to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces. Read more in Article I, Section 8 and Article II, Section 2.

    Ron Paul quote:
    Under our Constitution, we as individuals have the right, and I would argue even a moral obligation, to right wrongs in the world around us;, but our government, under the Constitution, has no such authority.
    http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=14

    God says:
    Romans 13:
    1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

    Ron Paul has it backwards- as individuals we are told that we should not “avenge ourselves” (Romans 12:19) “return evil for evil” or execute personal retribution (Romans 12:17, 1Thess. 5:15, 1 Peter 3:9)… the act of avenging evil belongs to authorities and government alone. NOT individuals.

    More unfathomables:

    Paul voted against the Political Freedom in China Act of 1997.
    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1997/roll580.xml

    Paul voted against a 2006 resolution condemning religious persecution in China.
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2006-253

  5. Brian

    Cary and invar:

    First, Dr. Paul’s votes on those China bills fits right in with those original socialefties’ (Washington and Jefferson) warnings against foreign entanglements: don’t tell other people how to run their business. Another maxim that applies: don’t try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes you time and annoys the pig.

    Second, misapplication of scripture is rampant in the apostate country, and understandably so. Your incorrect interpretation of Romans 13 shows that you are victim to this phenomenon. [The Apostle] Paul was writing about a bilateral contract, with three signatories: God and rulers, and subjects (or citizens) are conditionally bound by it. This contract is only valid as long as all signatories abide by it; there are only two possibilities for violating its terms.

    One God withdraws from it. As God is immutable, this is not possible.

    TwoThe king forgets his moral obligation to rule his subjects in a godly fashion, making sure to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, thereby removing the subjects’ requirement of abiding by the decrees of a tyrant. King George behaved in this way, thus providing the justification for the Founders’ revolt: violation of the moral contract.

    If [the Apostle] Paul had intended that all governments, regardless of morality were valid, then, by your reckoning, he would have denounced the Christians in Rome who refused to worship Caesar, and thus were thrown into the Coliseum to meet their deaths; in fact, he would have denounced Moses, David, Elijah, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, and many, many more. Please see my “immutable God” comment above. When the government abandons God, Christians have a right — no, an obligation — to resist it.

    To suggest that America is somehow justified in prosecuting a war of aggression in a foreign land — ordained by God, in fact — is to show complete ignorance of well over a millennium of Christian philosophical thought. Augustine’s theory of “Just War” (as subsequently refined) has long been the standard, accepted almost unanimously across all Christian denominations. While justification for Afghanistan was thin, that for Iraq, and more so Iran, is nonexistent. These are just extemporaneous excuses for American hegemony at the cost of American lives.

    And before you denounce me as some leftist “Blame/Hate America First”coward, you should know that I am a card-carrying conservative and a US veteran (of a Clintonian/Neocon foreign war); I have put my life on the line for this country that I love only less than my Savior, my wife, and my children. I somehow doubt that is a claim you can make, much like so many of your chickenhawk brethren who scream for wars and escalation, as long as it’s someone else’s [deleted] in the crosshairs.

    As one Christian to another, I find your vitriol to be alarming, your bloodlust morally repugnant, and your dedication to an obviously immoral administration and its wars pathetic. Jesus enjoined us to go out and preach the Gospel — of His love and grace, not of democracy — to all the world.

    I find it absolutely disgusting that you and your ilk call for the utter destruction of both our brothers and sisters in Christ who happen to also be foreign patriots defending their homes, and that of those pagans most in need of the message of the Gospel. This, in response to some indiscernible and credulous “threat” from countries who have paltry standing armies, and neither air forces nor navies with which to prosecute foreign wars on distant lands.

    For shame. Repent, and turn to God.

  6. invar

    Dr. Paul’s votes on those China bills fits right in with those original socialefties’ (Washington and Jefferson) warnings against foreign entanglements: don’t tell other people how to run their business.

    Nice spin job. “Entangling alliances” that the Founders were warning about had NOTHING to do with trade agreements OR condemnation of heinous crimes and genocides. It had everything to do with the kind of defense alliances that Europe kept making to pit themselves against one another, and the kind of domino-effect alliances that led to WWI.

    It had NOTHING to do with condemning genocide, which Ron Paul refused to vote against.

    Ron Paul’s ideology is decidedly Libertarian Pacifist: “I’m Okay, You’re Okay, Live and Let Live, See No Evil – Let’s Trade!”

    Buffoonery on a gross scale.

    Your incorrect interpretation of Romans 13 shows that you are victim to this phenomenon.

    Actually, you’re spinning again. Cary’s point was taking Ron Paul to task in his quote that only individuals have an obligation to right wrongs in the world, and that government has no authority to do so.

    First, that is Constitutionally bogus as Paul asserts it, and second – it violates both biblical precedent and history of nation’s of God’s people being used as a sword of justice on evil empires.

    [The Apostle] Paul was writing about a bilateral contract, with three signatories: God and rulers, and subjects (or citizens) are conditionally bound by it.

    Excuse you – but Paul was NOT talking about the contract God established with Israel in terms of how Israel was to be ruled when they demanded a King.

    Paul was writing to the congregation in – WHERE?? ROME! Yes, he was writing to the Christians in Rome who were probably murmuring about rebelling against the pagan dictators and decrees of the Caesars. Paul was not writing about any mutual covenant of Christians and rulers of men, but a people who are born into and under the powers of men, describing to them how God views authority that Christians may be born under.

    To suggest that America is somehow justified in prosecuting a war of aggression….

    Your legitimacy just ended with that stupid quip.

    If you had not noticed, Americans have been KILLED by the Jihadists and their supporters and sponsors around the globe for decades.

    Did you forget 9-11? Or are you another one of those “Truthers” who think we did it to ourselves – or as your messiah puts it: “We caused it because we’re over there”.

    While justification for Afghanistan was thin, that for Iraq, and more so Iran, is nonexistent.

    Bullpuckey. Osama declared war on us in 1998. Sadaam followed in 1999. Ahmadinejad swears of our soon-coming annihilation by their hands to usher in the 12th Imam. Justification was made, given and acted upon by these cretins – America has every justification to war on them as profusely as we did the nazis in WWII.

    Had Ron Paul been president in 1941 – we’d be goosestepping to Hitler and speaking Japanese today.

    As one Christian to another, I find your vitriol to be alarming, your bloodlust morally repugnant, and your dedication to an obviously immoral administration and its wars pathetic.

    You’re welcome to go yourself and give Jihadists a big wet kiss and hug to assuage what you think is ‘bloodlust’ – but some of us remember what the Jihadists did to our families and countrymen on 9-11 and before.

    Some of us are not as stupid to think being pacifists in the face of real evil or consignment to blaming such evil on our existence is going to stop or end hostile actions against us like you and your messiah seem to believe.

    Jesus enjoined us to go out and preach the Gospel — of His love and grace, not of democracy — to all the world.

    That is an individual responsibility, not a national one. The national responsibility is for the commone defense and welfare of this republic. Sorry that escapes you.

    I find it absolutely disgusting that you and your ilk call for the utter destruction of both our brothers and sisters in Christ who happen to also be foreign patriots defending their homes

    Yo mean Jihadists setting up IEDs and strapping bombs to their kids to blow up school busses??? They certainly ARE NOT MY brethren, and it’s telling you honor their patriotism to kill infidels, and excoriate fellow countrymen as worse than evil.

    I think that speaks volumes what an insane and crazy mob you truly are.

    and that of those pagans most in need of the message of the Gospel.

    Go. Get thee hence! Nothing stopping YOU to go and knock on doors in Iran or Iraq with bible in hand to make disciples.

    This, in response to some indiscernible and credulous “threat” from countries who have paltry standing armies, and neither air forces nor navies with which to prosecute foreign wars on distant lands.

    Iran is making nukes you imbecile, and 19 Jihadists with boxcutters and duct tape managed to kill 3,000 of us in a few moment’s time.

    Get a freaking clue.

    For shame. Repent, and turn to God.

    I don’t think we worship the same God. Especially when you refer to Jihadists as “brethren” and “patriots”.

  7. Brian

    Where to begin?

    Your discourse so often devolves into non-sequiturs and perjoritives, it’s hard to sort it out into intelligent conversation. But I’ll try.

    “Entagling alliances” refers to anything but trade (Jefferson) in order to keep us from being pulled into foreign intrigues (Washington). It is therefore logical that it should extend to not trying to tell the entire rest of the world what to do. Interventionism in regulation of other countries’ religious activities, by the way, is prima facie evidence of a lack of vigor in faith in the power of the Spirit. Besides, peaceful commerce allows the fruits of democracy to spread without having to hack through all the propagandist rhetoric an enemy can produce. And “genocide” is not what the resolution addressed.

    Romans 13 Dr. Paul was saying that as a state, we have no right to interfere. But as Chrisitan individuals, we have an obligation to intervene. Part of his platform is trying to wean Americans off the “Nanny State” and start taking action as individuals to correct society’s problems. Here, or anywhere else. And you cannot justify “total war” doctrine with New Testament theology.

    The contract You dolt, I am not talking about 1 Samuel. It is established reformed theology that a variation of Locke’s “social contract” — albeit without the Enlightenment secularism — exists, and that Paul in Romans 13 was addressing, for the first time, this relationship, in much the same way I have described it. Read Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox, et al.

    War of aggression Part of “just war” theory is that of proportionality. Chuck Colson has written on this, if you like modern thinkers. 3,000 dead (mostly) Americans were avenged in Afghanistan. Thousands of casualties, and hundreds of thousands to millions effectively “ethnically cleansed” by dislocation due to this sham war far exceeds any rational discussion of proportionality. And almost double the number of 9-11 victims have been KIA in Iraq, reinforcing the “proportionality” excess. You people are very liberal with other people’s lives.

    Justification Intelligence service incompetence notwithstanding — which was the direct cause of 9/11 — , bin Laden and Hussein are/were paper tigers. As are your arguments about Hitler and Japan. Hitler couldn’t even take the UK, right across the channel; what makes you believe he could invade across the Pond? An Japan projected as much as it could to get to Pearl; it would never have plled off an invasion of the mainland. Not to mention, that would have been a defensive posture — our declaring against Japan was justified — and defensive war is justified (but still sinful).

    Bloodlust The “invade the world” mentality of you and your neocon brethren can be described as nothing else. What you call pacifism, I’d call rationality; where does the love for killing end? When every dissenter is on a pike? That’s a real Christ-like attitude.

    Gospel Dubya’s — and I voted for him in 2000, against Kerry in 2004 — gospel is “hegemony in the name of democracy.” That can only be the purview of tyrannical government; and isn’t anywhere in Matthew 28:18-20

    Brethren/patriots If you would take off yourblood-colored glasses for a minute, you would see that I called neocon chickenhawk warmongers your ilk, and Iraqi Christians your brethren. As “patriots” is not a word that applies solely to Americans, it fits for anyone defemding his hom,eland against a foreign invasion or occupation. Whether you will admit it or not, we have been occupying various portions of the ME for decades. Would that not piss you off if it were happening here? Or are Americans somehow the only humans divinely commissioned to defend their homes?

    Pagans I think it’s telling that you find it much more palatable to send someone else to die in a desert than to consider making an effort at spreading the Word.

    Iran Iran hasn’t been trying to make nukes for at least several years now. But that’s not good enough for you chickenhawks; George the Younger now says (after the NIE) that even if they’re only making power, not weapons, they have to be stopped. When will it be good enough? When they abdicate national sovereignty and consent to being the United States East Annex? They have no military might to speak of, nor any ability to project a threat!! Have you no concept of military strategy? But no, you don’t… you’re just a chickenhawk. Go play a game of Risk.

    God I worship the God of Israel, The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The God Who became flesh and sacrificed Himself for the salvation of mankind. Not the “all paths lead to the same god” god of your neocon “true Islam is a religion of peace” despot “W.”

    Read a book. And stop letting your nanny state spoon-feed you all your ideas.

    What I can’t understand is your other pages on this blog speak to a knowledge of the spiritual foundations of this country; yet when it comes to anything post-1800, you lose all historical perspective, and you seem to have no knowledge whatsoever of Christian philosophy, at least until the current “all you need to know about politics is George Bush says he’s a Christian” tripe.

  8. invar

    “Entagling alliances” refers to anything but trade

    WRONG. That is what you and your messiah Ron Paul INSIST that they meant.

    It’s interesting that the very Founders you insist eschewed any kind of “entangling alliances” in the scope of sending military aid, or money to support one regime or another – are the very same Founders who beseeched military and financial aid from France during our contest with the Crown.

    As I said, the Founders’ definition of “entangling Alliances” was built upon the well-known European history of the centuries that plunged post-renaissance Europe into endless squabbles and alliances via royal marriages and secret military treaties and pacts. They wished to keep America divorced from such European webs of alliance so as to keep us from commiting troops to squabbles between royals.

    Regardless of our points of view, the fact remains that the world we exist in was shaped and crafted from the consequences of WWI – that propelled us to our current state. Undoing 90 years of history by simply pulling out and walking away is more than stupid – it’s suicide.

    But that’s what your messiah syas he wants to do, and you all sing hosannas to him for it.

    It is therefore logical that it should extend to not trying to tell the entire rest of the world what to do.

    I know. It’s so wrong of us to tell genocidal maniacs to stop annihilating people; to stop making threats on their neighbors and our interests; to say “We do not trust you with nukes after your promise to wipe Israel off the map and burn American cities”. Shame on us for doing that.

    I mean, we should damn that Jefferson too, for daring to tell the Barbary Consortium in Tripoli and their Mohammedists to stop waging war on our merchant ships and putting an end to it by waging war on them. It so goes against what our Founders intended!

    Oh…that’s right…..Jefferson WAS a Founder.

    Oops. Guess Jefferson was either a hypocrite, or he didn’t mean what you infer as “telling other nations what to do”.

    Killing and enslaving Americans means we get to tell those aiding, harboring and abetting such acts – what to do. Using Jefferson’s own example. We war on them until they sue for peace on our terms or are annihilated.

    Interventionism in regulation of other countries’ religious activities, by the way, is prima facie evidence of a lack of vigor in faith in the power of the Spirit.

    I know, it is so awful of us to condemn honor killings, beheadings and other fun activities the Jihadists daily engage in on themselves and other infidels.

    Jihadists therefore should be left alone to prepare, arm and practice for our annihilation, because to intervene and stop them is apparently a lack of faith in God in your twisted estimation.

    No wonder you Ron Paul people are called nuts and kooks.

    Romans 13 Dr. Paul was saying that as a state, we have no right to interfere. But as Chrisitan individuals, we have an obligation to intervene.

    See ya. Good luck hunting down Osama with your shotgun and bible in hand, oh and when you’re over there – pop in and witness to Ahmadinejad, step out in faith brutha – and put your God to the test!! I’m sure ‘witnessing’ to Ahmadinejad will stop his maniacal quest to fulfill Islamic prophecy and jump-start the clash of civilizations.

    Part of his platform is trying to wean Americans off the “Nanny State” and start taking action as individuals to correct society’s problems.

    By being a dictator? A Messiah?

    That’s the only way he’s going to be able to dismantle the Welfare State.

    It’s totally sickening to see how much stupid and wrong faith people put into one man to do everything including walking on water. One of your fellow supporters actually said that Ron Paul is the Second or Third Coming of Christ.

    I want no part of your mob’s idolatry.

    And you cannot justify “total war” doctrine with New Testament theology.

    Read Zechariah 14. You’re in for a major surprise.

    It is established reformed theology that a variation of Locke’s “social contract” — albeit without the Enlightenment secularism — exists, and that Paul in Romans 13 was addressing, for the first time, this relationship, in much the same way I have described it.

    Biblically false. There was no “reformed theology” at the time of Paul outside of (as Josephus put it) ‘a sect of the Jews preaching Jesus’. Paul was directly addressing Christian converts in Pagan Rome – citizens and slaves of an empire on whether subjecting themselves to Roman Law was a violation of Talmudic law – treating Roman officials as ‘unclean’ and not subjecting themselves to Roman Law. Paul was not addressing a new social contract between how Christians should choose and view their rulers since Christians had no such say in Rome.

    War of aggression Part of “just war” theory is that of proportionality

    I don’t buy into that bass ackwards approach of thinking, thank God our Founders did not either.

    You fight war to win, period. Not play tit for tat and think you are noble because you killed exactly the same number of those killed by your enemy. This is stupid.

    When God told Saul to “utterly destroy the Amelekites” – and other wars Ancient Israel fought – it was a war to win, not to exact ‘proportionality’.

    Sheesh! If we let people like you fight the Nazis and Japs – hell, we’d have LOST!

    bin Laden and Hussein are/were paper tigers.

    Go tell that to the family members of 3,000 dead Americans you idiot! Try telling that to some firefighters that get to drive by a massive hole in the ground where gleaming towers once stood bright seven years ago. Tell them “it’s our fault – we provoked Jihadists to do that”. I dare ya.

    No wonder some of us consider you Ron Paul people absolute disgraces, along with the rest of the Anti-war Leftists you’ve cuddled up to as pals.

    Bloodlust The “invade the world” mentality of you and your neocon brethren can be described as nothing else.

    I know, it’s all us damn Joos and Joo Lovers that you Stormfront Nazis cannot stand. It’s why you say disgusting stupidities like “Hitler was no threat to us, and neither was Japan”.

    You’re a walking victim just waiting to happen. Problem is, you are demanding the rest of us become victims right along with you.

    No thanks.

    It’s either that or you are Jihadist sympathisers. The fact you people consitently side with and apologize for our enemies, parroting their propaganda, citing their justifications to kill Americans as your political platform is disgusting.

    I called neocon chickenhawk warmongers your ilk, and Iraqi Christians your brethren.

    Listen idiot, Iraqi Christians are NOT strapping bombs to themselves and kids, setting IED traps and ambushes for our troops. Iraqi Christians are not yelling “Allu Ackbar!” while sawing off the heads of bound Americans. You are simply despicable in your deliberate spin of who is warring on us over there. Iraqis are not the ones being ‘patriots’ to defend their homes against American evildoers. They are Saudi, Yemenese, Syrian, Egyptian, Jordanian, Palestinian and Iranian Jihadist insurgents waging war on the Great Satan in the sands of Babylon and using the Iraqi people as shields and pawns to do so.

    This conversation is a freaking waste. I might as well be talking with Jimmy Carter or Arafat for all the time I’ve wasted replying to a spinmeister for our Jihadist enemies.

    I want nothing to do with you kind of people. You’re delusional false messiah worshippers, putting your faith in a mere man to do political miracles for you. And you’ll twist the scriptures to meet your twisted interpretation of it as assuredly as you do the Constitution you say your messiah stands for.

    Oh, and the death threats and other fun suggestions of violence I’ve received tonight from your fellow cult-worshippers, the ones who wrap themselves in the Constitution and the Bible – is being dealt with.

    Your mob is the same thing as what the Brownshirts were in Germany in the 30’s.

    So we have the Ron Paul Mob Zombie Brownshirts on one side, and the Secular Left Stalinists on the other side – using one another’s platforms and candidates to create an unholy alliance that appeases and apologizes for Jihadist Islam and paints “neocons” and those eeevviiiil Joos – as the real evil on the planet, complete with threats of death and violence for anyone daring to disagree with their messiahs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s