You know I am not convinced that Carol Paul isn't the Purple Heart Bandaid Lady.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: ourbigdumbmouth: I think the most entertaining thing that could come out of this would be a Obama vs Paul debate.

So I guess this doesn't count:

Close enough for me. I'm not picky

That story was full of Nguyen.

2012 RNC Convention Trailer:

"In a world where socialists run amuck....
And a weak economy threatens to destroy the universe....
One man.... well, make that two.... will stand up to Obama's reign of terror!

Romney: I will be the severe conservative you've always wanted!
Paul: I will let individual liberties ring throughout the land (unless you're gay or non-Christian)!
Romney: I will be the most pro-life candidate in the history of the world, past, present or future!
Paul: I will bring us back to the gold standard!

In the silly season of politics, only one convention can bring you the heights, the thrills, the PURE UNADULTERATED DERP you've been waiting for!"

DarnoKonrad: I honestly don't know what to think of these stories. Is this a real problem or media hype?

In no way, shape or form could the fracturing of the GOP be considered a problem.

Slaves2Darkness: TyrantII: Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 379x214]

Isn't this what participatory democracy is supposed to look like?

I find it amusing that this small contingent is using GOP tactics against itself. Sure it's divide by zero territory, but it's the same strategy that the Corporatist wing, and more recently the Fundamentalist wing has used to dominate the party. Only proper the libertarians do it too.

They won't change or stop Romney this election, but they will get their hands on some important committees and be able to change party rules for next time. Ron's committed to gumming up the work and laying the foundation for his son.

Porpcorn.gif is right.

It is not divide by zero if what Ron Paul really wants is Rand Paul for VP. Then the more delegates he gets the better negotiating position he will be in when the convention gets here.

That strategy seems pretty gay.

All I can say is: I CAN'T WAIT FOR AUGUST

Philip Francis Queeg: qorkfiend: Mentat: Coelacanth: Didn't these guys get the right to carry handguns around for the upcoming convention?

And it's in Florida, so Stand Your Ground laws apply.

I feel decidedly threatened by the GOP Convention.

I will be passing out bags of Skittles and "I love Ayn Rand" hoodies at the convention.

I would favorite you but I already have you favorited.

qorkfiend: Snarfangel: qorkfiend: Mentat: Coelacanth: Didn't these guys get the right to carry handguns around for the upcoming convention?

And it's in Florida, so Stand Your Ground laws apply.

I feel decidedly threatened by the GOP Convention.

Just remember to bring your +3 Skittles of Defending.

And my Hoodie of Light Fortification.

I put on my robe hoodie and wizard Skittles hat.

Esc7: Slaves2Darkness: It is not divide by zero if what Ron Paul really wants is Rand Paul for VP. Then the more delegates he gets the better negotiating position he will be in when the convention gets here.

Where did this meme come from that people are gunning for Rand Paul to have the VP slot? I honestly only see it on Fark, not anywhere else. It is ludicrous to me that such blatant nepotism would be anticipated from Romney in an already upward struggle for the presidency.

Seriously, Romney probably doesn't give a damn about the Paulites, he's got to win Flordia, Ohio, and Virginia. I expect his VP pick to be someone to help him there. Rubio is the completely obvious choice, though he seems lukewarm about the prospect.

Why are you so convinced about, at the very least, Ohio? There's been a pretty big backlash against the Republican Governor there.

I'm not really a Ron Paul supporter, even though I actually happen to support a lot of his positions. But I'm continually intrigued by the way in which the media carefully chooses to actively avoid discussing him, not just in this election but in past elections. It's such a weird phenomenon to me. This btw isn't only Ron Paul, it certainly applies to other fringe candidates, but even the debates very obviously give less time to other candidates. Can't help but think what a clusterfark the whole presidential election process is.

It's pretty hilarious to see the number of people delusional enough to debate the value of complete utter shiat. "shiat with corn is way better than shiat with peas, but we may end up with shiat and broccoli. Then again, we may find refried shiat or bacon-wrapped shiat if we rehash it enough..."

/go ahead Paul, please yell at cloud again

xanadian: All I can say is: I CAN'T WAIT FOR AUGUSTUS GLOOP

Hear, hear!

BMulligan: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Lumpmoose: a neoconservative movement

Let's make sure that we're agreeing on defined terms. I would define "neoconservatives" as "conservatives as conservatives who wish to use the government to actively advance their agenda." Now, neoconservatism is usually a Foreign Policy thing, so I'm being vague so that it can be applied to domestic issues.

Neo-conservatism is the evolved form of the political philosophy espoused by Leo Strauss. Because the word "neocon" has taken on such a broad meaning as to be virtually meaningless, I generally prefer the term "Straussian."

Good point. I went to school with a very Straussian bend to it (so much so that a professor got into a fist fight with an anti-Straussian in the bathroom before a colloquium). I'm all for throwing out "neo-conservative" as people have no real idea what it really means.

BMulligan: Neo-conservatism is the evolved form of the political philosophy espoused by Leo Strauss. Because the word "neocon" has taken on such a broad meaning as to be virtually meaningless, I generally prefer the term "Straussian."

Strauss' neo-conservatism is almost indistinguishable from fascism.

Ishkur: BMulligan: Neo-conservatism is the evolved form of the political philosophy espoused by Leo Strauss. Because the word "neocon" has taken on such a broad meaning as to be virtually meaningless, I generally prefer the term "Straussian."

Strauss' neo-conservatism is almost indistinguishable from fascism.

And people call me misinformed

Esc7: FeedTheCollapse: personally, I find the idea laughable and really underscores the naivete of Ron Paul supporters. They want to biatch about "stop voting for the lesser of 2 evils!", yet still are still willing to vote for a Republican, but are willing to vote for his son if only based on name recognition. It would also be funny as hell to watch former Paulites try to reconcile why Ron/Rand is promoting the previous disdained positions held by Romney.

You've hit the nail on the head. Ron Paul supporters are naive.

I call most paulites "political virgins" Ron Paul could be literally the first political figure they have supported. Not having to know how every other politician has to make comprises and get real work done allows Ron Paul's followers to imagine his brand of idealistic "Dr. No" is scaleable. It isn't.

He's the perfect candidate for political hipsters. Libertarianism allows you to look down your nose at BOTH political parties, AND say things that are shockingly uncaring and sound faux-intelligent! Win-win!

And does anybody wonder why his most rabid supporters are white college aged males with degrees from the Colleges of Engineering (Aspergers)?

In your opinion, could the same be said for Obama? I mean, political virgins were important to his campaign. Could the youth of this nation latched upon him because of his charisma?

cman: And people call me misinformed

Would you like me to go in depth about it? I can, but don't have the time at the moment, so let me give you the Cole's notes version:

The death of Leo Strauss was not really anything important, it was just just coincidence that it happened in the most important year of the last half of the twentieth century (1973 -- for numerous other reasons). The man was hardly a household name when he lived but renewed interest after his death in his contributions to the philosophy of realism and political theory created, among the new business class of boomers, a ripple effect of enthusiasm in his ideas. They were a harsh mix of Machiavelli, Hobbes, Nietzsche and absolutism, and were a distinct Hegelian reaction to the social liberalism of the 60s, which he found abhorrent.

At it's crux were 4 major political values:

- Religion is mandatory (but only as a form of crowd control)
- Aggressive foreign policy (we're number 1, we're number 1)
- Elitist hierarchy (the government only tells its people what they "need to know")
- Constant fear of perceived outside threats (commies, terrorism etc)

Essentially, Leo Strauss did what all popular philosophers do: He told powerful men what they wanted to hear. Strauss' pupils (among them Henry Jaffa, Andrew Sullivan, William Kristol, Rupert Murdoch, Alan Bloom, and Paul Wolfowitz) from the University of Chicago then went on to spread his gospel further, mixing with Reaganism in the 80s to create a fiercely aggressive new political platform that we today know as neo-conservatism.

It's been running the Republican party for the past 30 years, which has become a front for these quasi-fascist principles that old Conservatives like Goldwater and Eisenhauer warned about, fought against, and wouldn't approve of today.

kona: Popcorn

Ah, you read my mind. Extra butter please.

As much as I despise RON PAUL and his supporters, they have every right to be there, and I am looking forward to any choas they can inflict on both the establishment and the teabagger base.