Support NeoGAF

[Stoney Mason]

Right Wing News emailed more than 225 right-of-center bloggers and asked them to send us a list of whom they considered to be their "Least Favorite People On The Right." Representatives from the following 45 blogs responded...

Aaron's CC, David All Group, The Anchoress, Baldilocks, Betsy's Page, Bit's Blog, Blonde Sagacity, Boi From Troy, Bookworm Room, The Captain's Journal, Captain's Quarters, Cassy Fiano, Conservative Grapevine, Damian Penny, Dissecting Leftism, Argghhhh!, Ed Driscoll, Election Projection, Musings, GraniteGrok, GOPUSA Northeast, --Ian Schwartz, IMAO, Inside Larry's Head, Jihad Watch, Likelihood of Success, Rachel Lucas, Barking Moonbat Early Warning System, Moonbattery, mountaineer musings, Pal2pal, Pirate's Cove, PoliPundit, PrestoPundit, Right Thinking From The Left Coast, Right Wing Rocker, Matt Sanchez, Don Singleton, Solomonia, Stop The ACLUDon Surber, Texas Rainmaker, dcthornton.com, Vox Popoli, WILLisms

All bloggers were allowed to make anywhere from 1-12 unranked selections and were allowed to choose anybody on the right or generally perceived to be on the right that they liked: Republican, Conservative, Libertarian, politician, preacher, blogger, columnist, radio host, you name it!

The field was wide open -- with two exceptions that I didn't want to clutter up the list since they have absolutely no support in the party: racist David Duke, who never won national office and Democrat Fred Phelps of God Hates F@gs fame, who often gets misidentified as a Republican.

Without further ado, here are the right-of-center bloggers' least favorite people on the right with the number of votes beside of each selection in parentheses:

18) Ted Stevens (4)
18) Olympia Snowe (4)
18) Mel Martinez (4)
18) Sean Hannity (4)
18) Lincoln Chafee (4)
17) Bill O'Reilly (5)
14) Lindsey Graham (6)
14) George W. Bush (6)
14) Mitt Romney (6)
12) Arnold Schwarzenegger (9)
12) Rudy Giuliani (9)
8) Andrew Sullivan (11)
8) Chuck Hagel (11)
8) James Dobson (11)
8) Ann Coulter (11)
6) Arlen Specter (12)
6) Pat Robertson (12)
4) Larry Craig (13)
4) Michael Savage (13)
3) John McCain (17)
2) Pat Buchanan (18)
1) Ron Paul (23)

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2007/10/rightofcenter_bloggers_select_3.php

 

[Tamanon]

That's another win in my book!

 

[reilo]

Funny. Paul is more Republican than all the other names on that list combined.

I guess right-wing bloggers hate republicans then.

 

[demon]

He really is that great.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Fuck Yes!

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

I lol'd in real life at this. Ron Paul spammers didn't know when to quit and now everyone hates Ron Paul even more. Good work.

 

[Gaborn]

I lol'd in real life at this. Ron Paul spammers didn't know when to quit and now everyone hates Ron Paul even more. Good work.

Yes, they hate him enough to give him 5 million dollars. I wish people hated me that much.

 

[APF]

I lol'd in real life at this. Ron Paul spammers didn't know when to quit and now everyone hates Ron Paul even more. Good work.

.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I lol'd in real life at this. Ron Paul spammers didn't know when to quit and now everyone hates Ron Paul even more. Good work.

When did 23 people turn into everyone?

 

[speculawyer]

Wow . . . what a bunch of authoritarian lemmings.

If someone dares break from the party line, they instantly become hated. I guess this authoritarian discipline is what made the right successful for a while . . . but it is also leading to their huge downfall which continues today.

 

[MassiveAttack]

.

. = .000000023

 

[ErasureAcer]

When did 23 people turn into everyone?

I still haven't seen that movie. :lol

 

[Cheebs]

Yes, they hate him enough to give him 5 million dollars. I wish people hated me that much.

If you think his donations came from republicans then you are clueless.

 

[Tamanon]

If you think his donations came from republicans then you are clueless.

They did in my case.

 

[Karma Kramer]

If you think his donations came from republicans then you are clueless.

If you think you know where the donations have come from period... you are clueless.

Considering how positive you and Stoney are that Ron Paul has absolutely zero chance of taking the nomination... you sure do spend a lot of time trying to "prove" that point to the rest of us; or at least mock those of us who do support him.

What you and Stoney keep forgetting though, is we (or at least I) never started supporting Ron Paul, because we thought he could win. We support him because he shares the same ideas and principals as us. Nothing else fucking matters in my opinion. This isn't a horse race... and there is no money at stake. Its all about voicing your opinion through the support of the candidate that most represents you.

Republican vs Democrats, ect is all a bunch of fucking soap opera shit, that is pointless to me. Its just as idiotic as the fucking video game console wars over on the gaming network.

If you want to discuss and debate his ideas and principals then I am all for it. But this thread should have been posted in the official polling thread... and actually considering the source (rightwingnews) shouldn't have been posted at all.

But I guess Stoney has to fill his daily quota of political threads. So what can you do?

 

[speculawyer]

If you think his donations came from republicans then you are clueless.

Ron paul received more donations from military people than any other GOPer prez candidate. And I'd guess that the vast majority of those military people are GOPers.

 

[JayDubya]

If you think his donations came from republicans then you are clueless.

And what, you think his donations came from Democrats?

I'm quite happy to have donated to Paul's campaign.

 

[laserbeam]

If you think you know where the donations have come from period... you are clueless.

Considering how positive you and Stoney are that Ron Paul has absolutely zero chance of taking the nomination... you sure do spend a lot of time trying to "prove" that point to the rest of us; or at least mock those of us who do support him.

What you and Stoney keep forgetting though, is we (or at least I) never started supporting Ron Paul, because we thought he could win. We support him because he shares the same ideas and principals as us. Nothing else fucking matters in my opinion. This isn't a horse race... and there is no money at stake. Its all about voicing your opinion through the support of the candidate that most represents you.

Republican vs Democrats, ect is all a bunch of fucking soap opera shit, that is pointless to me. Its just as idiotic as the fucking video game console wars over on the gaming network.

If you want to discuss and debate his ideas and principals then I am all for it. But this thread should have been posted in the official polling thread... and actually considering the source (rightwingnews) shouldn't have been posted at all.

But I guess Stoney has to fill is daily quote of political threads. So what can you do?

You sir are a wise man. It should be about what people believe in not idiotic blanket party support.

 

[GoutPatrol]

WARNING WARNING RANT RANT

SHORT VERSION: RON PAUL SUCKS

To all Ron Paul supporters:

Are you guys fucking nuts? Did you think the 19th century was that great? Was it always puppies, lollipops, and sunshine? Before, when the government was “not involved in daily life” like it somehow is now, was it a wonderful time to live? Hell no.

To whoever says that Ron Paul is all about protecting the rights of the people on the internet? BULLSHIT. Guess who happens to be against Net Neutrality?

To whoever says America was founded, that there were no big companies and Ron Paul is trying to bring that back: BULLSHIT. Who the hell founded Jamestown and Plymouth? Don’t believe that these people came here for freedom, those settlements were funded by their respective British companies. America was always about corporations.

You say that the free market will somehow police itself, and everything will be right in the end. I ask you this: when the FUCK has the free market ever played fair? When did it police itself? When children in coalmines were losing limbs, when men and women in factories worked for 14 hours a day and got hurt, what did the companies say? “Tough shit kid, you shouldn’t of gotten hurt?” The market never policed itself. It has never, ever been about the consumer. “Buh buh buh the people can choose not to support them!” BULLSHIT. People are stupid. They’ll keep supporting them because they don’t know any better or don’t have a choice.

Please, let us go back to a time before child labor laws. Please, let us go back to a time where there were no unions and people really were just cogs in the fucking machine. Let’s go back to before the EPA, when rivers caught on fire when people dumped everything and anything into the rivers because they could. “But with private property rights they shouldn’t be allowed to do that!” BULLSHIT. They’ll keep doing it because it’s easier. Let’s go back where you could only buy lead-based paint, and every wall was fireproofed with asbestos. I wonder why you can’t buy those things anymore? Was it because companies who made them thought it was a good idea? No, they fought to keep this shit because it was easier and a hell of a lot cheaper. Let’s go back to a time when we have no FDA, so every meat packing plant is like The Jungle. Boy, it sure worked out great for the companies there! What a coincidence that it only stopped when the government stepped in!

How about we get rid of the Federal Reserve too, because as Ron Paul says that one institution alone is the cause for all recessions and depressions. All those panics and economic depressions that happened on a cycle in the 19th century, let’s just forget them. Remember when banks just closed down and everyone who put their savings in them got fucked because you couldn’t get your money back? Yeah, they called that every depression that ever existed until the FDIC. And hey, let’s get rid of all the public schools! What a fucking great idea, get rid of all the schools! And you say, “Well, they should just be home schooled” well tell that to the parents who aren’t qualified to be teaching their kids psychics and chemistry and trigonometry. “Well what about Private school?” Yeah, let make the parents pay for their children’s basic education. Let them fight it out. And then finally, let’s go back to a time when only white men with property could vote. Boy, how ingenious of our founding fathers to slip that little nugget in? Our country is based on the Protestant Ethic, is it not? That only the ones who own property have any rights?

To believe in Ron Paul is to believe in a man who wants to destroy modern society.

 

[Souldriver]

What the fuck. Fred Phelps is a democrat? How on earth is he allowed to be member of that party or even associated with it? Or any party for that matter. :/

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

What the fuck. Fred Phelps is a democrat? How on earth is he allowed to be member of that party or even associated with it? Or any party for that matter. :/

Supposedly he has ties with Al Gore. Junior or Senior, I'm not sure.

 

[Karma Kramer]

To believe in Ron Paul is to believe in a man who wants to destroy modern society.

A lot of what you are talking about was solved with the modernization of technology. Something that has thankfully at least in the electronic market flourished and is still flourishing thanks to the fact of minimal government intervention.

Ron Paul's principals are very simple and with a bit of common sense you should be able to distinguish and imagine a society run by those principals. Just think of the free market as an extension of individual freedom. Switzerland for example is an excellent example of a very free nation with very little restrictions on liberties... and it has very little crime or hardship...

Freedom doesn't mean chaos, death, and destruction. The positives greatly out weight the negatives imo.

 

[lunarworks]

Electing Ron Paul is about as good of an idea as that reality show with a town run by kids.

 

[PhoenixDark]

It's amazing that someone who won't get 5% of the primary vote is able to generate such support. But then again, this is the internet which doesn't reflect reality.

Rudy, Romney, Thompson, McCain, Huckabee. That's more than 85% of the vote right there. Paul is just as irrelevent as Brownback and that black guy, but he's been able to make more noise due to the support he gets from people who won't even (or can't) vote for him in a primary.

 

[speculawyer]

The field was wide open -- with two exceptions that I didn't want to clutter up the list since they have absolutely no support in the party: racist David Duke, who never won national office and Democrat Fred Phelps of God Hates F@gs fame, who often gets misidentified as a Republican.

Racist David Duke clearly does have support since he was elected to an office (do you have to win a national office to claim having support?). He was clearly ommitted since he is overtly embarassing.

I don't think you can say the same of Fred Phelps, I don't believe he has even been elected to any office.

 

[Karma Kramer]

It's amazing that someone who won't get 5% of the primary vote is able to generate such support. But then again, this is the internet which doesn't reflect reality.

Rudy, Romney, Thompson, McCain, Huckabee. That's more than 85% of the vote right there. Paul is just as irrelevent as Brownback and that black guy, but he's been able to make more noise due to the support he gets from people who won't even (or can't) vote for him in a primary.

What?

Why would someone support him and then not vote for him?

 

[speculawyer]

What the fuck. Fred Phelps is a democrat? How on earth is he allowed to be member of that party or even associated with it? Or any party for that matter. :/

Anyone can say they belong to any party. It is meaningless statement to say XXXX is a Republican or Democrat unless that person has been elected to some office.

 

[Tamanon]

What?

Why would someone support him and then not vote for him?

Phoenix is just crafting a different version of the "only democrats support Ron Paul" talking point.

 

[PhoenixDark]

What?

Why would someone support him and then not vote for him?

He gets a lot of support from liberals and many registered dems who won't be able to vote for him in primaries. My state would allow registered dems to vote in the republican primary, but not all do.

He's a joke

 

[speculawyer]

What?

Why would someone support him and then not vote for him?

People often donate to people as 'spoiler' candidates. For example, many GOPers donated heavily to Ralph Nader to make him a 'spoiler' candidate that would draw votes away from a Dem candidate.

However, I think most of this talk about Ron Paul being a spoiler candidate is largely bunk . . . he is way too speculative to be a spoiler candidate . . . how does giving money to Ron Paul help democrats? He doesn't. I think it is paranoid whining. Perhaps a small amount of the Ron paul donations are from (dumb) people thinking he is a spoiler, but he really isn't one.

 

[Tamanon]

Yeah in order for Ron Paul to be seen as a spoiler candidate, he'd actually have to be able to siphon off votes from the leader. He and Giuliani are basically polar opposites, so no siphoning there.

 

[speculawyer]

He gets a lot of support from liberals and many registered dems who won't be able to vote for him in primaries.

You have no proof of that . . . that's just whining, IMHO.

Ron Paul probably gets a lot of support from Libertarians and the GOPers that are tired of money-wasting war-mongering.

 

[JayDubya]

Are you guys fucking nuts?

Why do you hate freedom? It's about on the same level of rhetoric, but really, seriously, unironically, why do you hate freedom? Paul's message is all about limited, efficient government that generally stays out of people's business, in matters both foreign and domestic.

Did you think the 19th century was that great?

Did you think it was that bad?

BULLSHIT. People are stupid. They’ll keep supporting them because they don’t know any better or don’t have a choice.

So you tell us people are stupid and need to be told what's best for them, and we're the offensive, crazy ones. Nice.

 

[Karakand]

The obsession with a candidate that's almost entirely irrelevant by the Ron Paul Strike Force is a level below pathetic.

 

[Tamanon]

The obsession with a candidate that's almost entirely irrelevant by the Ron Paul Strike Force is a level below pathetic.

Says the supporter of UCLA and Oakland.

 

[GoutPatrol]

Why do you hate freedom? No seriously, unironically, why do you hate freedom?

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Did you think it was that bad?

Yes.

So you tell us people are stupid and need to be told what's best for them, and we're the offensive, crazy ones. Nice.

Who ever said to tell them what's best for them?

 

[Karma Kramer]

He gets a lot of support from liberals and many registered dems who won't be able to vote for him in primaries. My state would allow registered dems to vote in the republican primary, but not all do.

He's a joke

A lot of support? Can you provide some numbers to back up this claim?

Also you can always switch from Democrat to Republican for the primaries. Its not like its set in stone once you go one way... lol.

Any talk you hear about democrats supporting Ron Paul is usually from younger voters because those voters aren't usually aware of the values that a traditional/libertarian candidate holds.

I used to be a democrat because I saw it as the lesser of two evils... but Ron Paul has officially sealed me as libertarian/republican.

Ron Paul ideas attract a lot of different types of people... and I think thats a good sign...

It doesn't make him a joke. If anything it makes him stronger for standing up against his party... makes him a greater leader.

 

[JayDubya]

Who ever said to tell them what's best for them?

You just did. You just said people are stupid, so they can't have freedom in what they choose to do. You're suggesting that humans are so stupid and weak that they need a large and powerful government to rule their lives.

This tells me about all I need to know about you Marxists.

 

[Karakand]

Says the supporter of UCLA and Oakland.

I'm fine with supporters being obsessed with him but Stoney Mason just seems like Andokuky kicking dirt on last season's Raider team... (pathetic)

 

[Tamanon]

I'm fine with supporters being obsessed with him but Stoney Mason just seems like Andokuky kicking dirt on last season's Raider team... (pathetic)

Oh, I mistook strike force for defense force.:lol

 

[speculawyer]

You just did. You just said people are stupid, so they can't have freedom in what they choose to do. You're suggesting that humans are so stupid and weak that they need a large and powerful government to rule their lives.

Many people are stupid. Do you contest that?

 

[Karakand]

Oh, I mistook strike force for defense force.:lol

Yeah I was afraid I chose the wrong way of phrasing that. :lol

 

[GoutPatrol]

You just did. You just said people are stupid, so they can't have freedom in what they choose to do. You're suggesting that humans are so stupid and weak that they need a large and powerful government to rule their lives.

This tells me about all I need to know about you Marxists.

I never said hey need a government to tell them what to do. I just said they were stupid. The government thing just usually happens. And you'll go "BUH BUH BUH THAT'S WHY THE PEOPLE NEED TO BE FREE TO FIGHT BACK!" and I go "Yawn."

This posts tells me all I need to know about Libertarians.

 

[speculawyer]

WARNING WARNING RANT RANT

You've got a lot points there . . . but keep in mind that President is not King. A president Paul would be kept in check by the Congress, Senate, and courts.

Well . . . that's the theory anyway . . . it sure hasn't work well to control Bush.

 

[Karakand]

If people are stupid then doesn't it follow that politicians and bureaucrats are stupid as well?

 

[PhoenixDark]

A lot of support? Can you provide some numbers to back up this claim?

Also you can always switch from Democrat to Republican for the primaries. Its not like its set in stone once you go one way... lol.

Any talk you hear about democrats supporting Ron Paul is usually from younger voters because those voters aren't usually aware of the values that a traditional/libertarian candidate holds.

I used to be a democrat because I saw it as the lesser of two evils... but Ron Paul has officially sealed me as libertarian/republican.

Ron Paul ideas attract a lot of different types of people... and I think thats a good sign...

It doesn't make him a joke. If anything it makes him stronger for standing up against his party... makes him a greater leader.

I don't have numbers with respect to that, but his popularity with the left is pretty undeniable. The anti war people support him in part because he's way more "anti war" than any democrat candidate, but I doubt he'll get their votes. Good point about the primary set up

I'm just shocked that someone who wants to dismantle the public education system among other things is taken so seriously by people. The republican party is truly splintering before our eyes; "true" conservatives are supporting fringe candidates, and religious right conservatives may form their own third party.

 

[Stoney Mason]

I'm fine with supporters being obsessed with him but Stoney Mason just seems like Andokuky kicking dirt on last season's Raider team... (pathetic)

I'm said quite a few nice things about him especially in regard to the Iraq War versus Democrats (and a few not so nice things.) Of course I don't support most of the rest of his ideas which range from idealistic, to interesting to downright crazy but this is a legit thread about an interesting observation. Imo you missed my motivation in posting this thread. I was more interested in pointing out something else.

 

[GoutPatrol]

If people are stupid then doesn't it follow that politicians and bureaucrats are stupid as well?

But they have money, which makes them better. Duh.

 

[Tamanon]

You've got a lot points there . . . but keep in mind that President is not King. A president Paul would be kept in check by the Congress, Senate, and courts.

Well . . . that's the theory anyway . . . it sure hasn't work well to control Bush.

Yeah, it's not like Paul would suddenly have the power to abolish all of government. What he would be able to do is keep the growth of it in check and work towards reducing it in portions.

 

[Karakand]

I'm said quite a few nice things about him especially in regard to the Iraq War versus Democrats (and a few not so nice things.) Of course I don't support most of the rest of his ideas which range from idealistic, to interesting to downright crazy but this is a legit thread about an interesting observation. Imo you missed my motivation in posting this thread. I was more interested in pointing out something else.

I blame your Instigator-like title.