Zydeco
11-01-2007, 03:09 PM
It is truly awe-inspiring to watch the Paulian blog-hordes defend, counterattack, and defeat these unfair attacks on Dr. Paul. We've got the brainpower and the tactics down pat.
Like others here, I spend a lot of time doing Google blog searches for mentions of Dr. Paul. In the past day there have been dozens of blogs picking up on this truly manufactured "spam scandal" as one blog has tried to puff it up.
And by the time I get to most blogs, the work is already done -- six or eight or twenty of us Paulians have already dissected and destroyed the argument intelligently and usually with just the right tone. I truly believe we are an intellectual army ready for anything they'll throw at us.
One interesting aspect of these attacks is they're virtually always anti-Paul, and not pro-another candidate. It's only very rarely that I see "Thompson (or whoever) has a better stance on this issue than Paul, and here's why)." Instead, it's simply "Ron Paul sucks, and here's why." Fascinating -- not only are the attacks weak, but they don't even have a stated candidate who they prefer on the issue. Purely a rearguard, defensive action disguised as an attack. And of course they have to defend -- our candidate is the one catching on like wildfire (if that's not gauche to say given recent events out West).
We're gonna win, we're gonna win big :D
Like others here, I spend a lot of time doing Google blog searches for mentions of Dr. Paul. In the past day there have been dozens of blogs picking up on this truly manufactured "spam scandal" as one blog has tried to puff it up.
And by the time I get to most blogs, the work is already done -- six or eight or twenty of us Paulians have already dissected and destroyed the argument intelligently and usually with just the right tone. I truly believe we are an intellectual army ready for anything they'll throw at us.
One interesting aspect of these attacks is they're virtually always anti-Paul, and not pro-another candidate. It's only very rarely that I see "Thompson (or whoever) has a better stance on this issue than Paul, and here's why)." Instead, it's simply "Ron Paul sucks, and here's why." Fascinating -- not only are the attacks weak, but they don't even have a stated candidate who they prefer on the issue. Purely a rearguard, defensive action disguised as an attack. And of course they have to defend -- our candidate is the one catching on like wildfire (if that's not gauche to say given recent events out West).
We're gonna win, we're gonna win big :D