Ron Paul, old coot who warned of economic turmoil, thinks he was right

[hugolp]

Ron Paul, old coot who warned of economic turmoil, thinks he was right

Read the whole thing : http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/03/ron-paul-obama.html

Hugo

[GunnyFreedom]

That's awesome! Even funnier (in the way of laughing at ourselves) that there are actually Ron Paul supporters at that blog who didn't get that it was sarcasm. Aren't we supposed to be smarter than your average bear?

[Golding]

That's the first positive Ron Paul article Andrew Malcolm has ever written. He spent the campaign ridiculing Ron Paul and supporters. Go figure.

[GunnyFreedom]

That's the first positive Ron Paul article Andrew Malcolm has ever written. He spent the campaign ridiculing Ron Paul and supporters. Go figure.

Maybe a little buyers remorse?

"Oh shit, what have I done?" :D

will he ever admit it and apologize? Yeah right. :rolleyes:

But the more he talks like that, the easier it will be for Gary Johnson in 2012. USE him to educate the electorate, and then drop Johnson on them like a bomb. :D :D :D

[bubbleboy]

I'm tingling, stop it Dr. Paul.

[angelatc]

That's the first positive Ron Paul article Andrew Malcolm has ever written. He spent the campaign ridiculing Ron Paul and supporters. Go figure.

You must be remembering a different Andrew Malcolm than I am.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/news-shocker-ro.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/ronpaul.html

Heres a DIGG link: http://digg.com/political_opinion/Ron_Paul_old_coot_who_warned_of_economic_turmoil_t hinks_he

[Golding]

You must be remembering a different Andrew Malcolm than I am.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/news-shocker-ro.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/ronpaul.html

Heres a DIGG link: http://digg.com/political_opinion/Ron_Paul_old_coot_who_warned_of_economic_turmoil_t hinks_heNope, same Andrew Malcolm.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/ron-paul-loser.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/ronpaulgop-1.html

Granted, I exaggerated by saying that it was his "first" positive article about RP, but nevertheless Malcolm and the "Top of the Times" blog frequently trolled people searching for Ron Paul news for some token hits. While it's nice that Ron Paul got some mentions in the blog, they frequently served to remind supporters that their candidate was losing, was a long-shot, had no chance, etc. Some people believe that any publicity is good publicity, but I'm not one of them.

[angelatc]

Nope, same Andrew Malcolm.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/ron-paul-loser.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/ronpaulgop-1.html

Granted, I exaggerated by saying that it was his "first" positive article about RP, but nevertheless Malcolm and the "Top of the Times" blog frequently trolled people searching for Ron Paul news for some token hits. While it's nice that Ron Paul got some mentions in the blog, they frequently served to remind supporters that Ron Paul was losing, was a long-shot, had no chance, etc. Some people believe that any publicity is good publicity, but I'm not one of them.

Do you think the media should have lied about the polls? Ron Paul was losing. Ron Paul did lose.

Just because Malcolm wasn't a fawning "Paultard" doesn't mean he was the enemy. There was a lot of truth in the criticisms he offered.

The first article you referenced can be summed up as follows. "Paul lost. Again. Why?" And we did. Accept it.

THe second article: "Paul gathered in only 5% of the vote, a lousy 5,812 ballots. " Truth hurts.

[Golding]

Do you think the media should have lied about the polls? Ron Paul was losing. Ron Paul did lose.

Just because Malcolm wasn't a fawning "Paultard" doesn't mean he was the enemy. There was a lot of truth in the criticisms he offered.

The first article you referenced can be summed up as follows. "Paul lost. Again. Why?" And we did. Accept it.

THe second article: "Paul gathered in only 5% of the vote, a lousy 5,812 ballots. " Truth hurts.There's a difference between reporting facts and trying to drive it in the face of supporters that their candidate is losing. You're confused into thinking that I'd rather Andrew Malcolm have been a Ron Paul shill. That's not at all the case. But the fact that Ron Paul did lose doesn't excuse the fact that Malcolm expressively took joy in the fact. He was an anti-Ron Paul shill, and frequently antagonized supporters for the sake of gaining views.

If you read through most articles Malcolm wrote about Ron Paul (feel free to read past the headlines, too), you'll see much more emphasis put on Paul's misfortunes. Like in the original article posted, usually it's in the form of thinly veiled sarcasm. At some point it stops being a "truth hurts" sort of thing, and it starts being a "haha, you're a loser" sort of thing.

[torchbearer]

we don't need shills, we need free thinking individuals who support our ideas after doing critical thinking.

[GunnyFreedom]

we don't need shills, we need free thinking individuals who support our ideas after doing critical thinking.

This.