Ron Paul Supporter doesn't like Ron Paul being Called a Dick

Avatar:
Ben Cohen
Author:
Publish date:
Social count:
10

Screen shot 2013-02-12 at 5.49.59 PM

I should have known that calling Ron Paul a 'dick' would bring hundreds of angry Ron Paul groupies over to the site and flooding the commenting system and our inbox. Some of the comments had to be deleted (I don't mind bad language as long as there's an intelligent argument or point being made, but straight up abuse won't be tolerated), but there were some points being made that were somewhat relevant to the topic at hand. I argued that Ron Paul's decision to sue the owners of RonPaul.com through a UN agency was hypocritical, and well, a bit of a dick thing to do. Apparently his supporters (at least the ones he's not suing) don't agree.

The annoying thing about Libertarians, particularly the Ron Paul devotees, is that they genuinely believe in a perfect world where governments don't exist and free markets solve everything. The idea is so pure and absolute that it is virtually impossible to argue with them.

Here's an abbreviated transcript of the debate I had with 'EzekielZ' - a commenter who simply could not fathom that anything other than a Ron Paul, free market utopia was not a fascist dictatorship. Sadly, the debate centered around my use of the word 'dick'. Probably not very adult of me, but then again, when it comes to this issue, Ron Paul is behaving like one.

Anyhow, here it is:

EzekielZ:

Ben Cohen: Don't worry about drones flying overheard, unsustainable debt, millions of people in jail for non-violent "drug crimes," "Constitution-free zones" where your laptop can be searched with no cause, or endless wars overseas. Just write "Ron Paul is a dick" on a subject you don't understand and go back to sleep.

Ben Cohen: My friend, I AGREE with Ron Paul on all the issue you outline. Have you ever read anything I've written? I suggest you do some googling before hurling around accusations. I think Paul gets a lot right, he's just bonkers when it comes to economics (his solutions, not his analysis mind you).

EzekielZ: Based on your monosyllablic headline "Wow, Ron Paul Is a Dick" I don't plan to spend any time Googling your writing. If you agree that the above issues are exponentially more important than RonPaul.com's ownership, then write about how the Obama Administration's policies are indistinguishable from his predecessor's on them instead of voting for him (at least once, which I'm sure you did; i doubt you're old enough to have done so twice) and giving him a free pass.

Joecaber: Surprised the owners of the domain weren't expecting that the poster child for "I got mine, good luck getting yours" philosophy now wants his and doesn't give a shit about yours.

EzekielZ: Joecaber: if you don't know anything about a subject it's best to be silent. Ron Paul -- as have the three of his five children who are physicians -- have always treated patients who cannot afford their services for free, so you mistake, either out of ignorance or purposely, his philosophy of life.

Ben Cohen: So what? Just because he's nice in his personal life doesn't mean his not a dick politically and philosophically. George Bush is probably a great bloke to have a beer with. Not so much when destroying the Middle East.

EzekielZ: Is everyone you disagree with politically a "dick"? Paul has an extremely compassionate view of human life, and if you think "I got mine, good luck getting yours" is anything like a reasonable summary of it then you've been misinformed. For starters, he would stop bombing and occupying countries around the world; he'd pardon hundreds of thousands of non-violent non-criminals currently locked up in cages by Dictator Obama (and by Dictator Bush before him); and he'd reverse the terrifying erosion of our civil liberties. "I've got mine, good luck getting yours" in no way addresses that.

You make the common mistake of those conditioned to love the State: that if a person does not believe the State can or should provide housing, health care, etc., to those unable to do so themselves, then they think that no one should or will. That is not true, and Paul's life has been exemplary in showing otherwise (as in treating patients for free, and even refusing Medicare from patients who could have paid him with it, on principle.

And you label this man, who is far more moral, compassionate and productive than the State he fights, a "dick"? Learn a new word, and learn more about Ron Paul before you pollute the web with any more of your misperceptions about him.

EzekielZ (continued): Ben Cohen couldn't care less whether someone is making money off Ron Paul's name or not. He cares about enriching the State, which he hopes to someday be part of. Psychologically, he already is, lock, stock & barrel.

Ben Cohen: You're an idiot. If you're going to comment here, say something intelligent.

EzekielZ: I'm an idiot and Ron Paul is a dick? That's some method of argumentation. Why don't you spend your time writing about the Obama (and Bush before him) Administration locking up millions of innocent people for "drug crimes," bombing millions more, destroying the middle class on behalf of the 1%, and destroying our civil liberties along with it. Calling the man who's done more to fight these things than anyone else in memory a "dick" removes you from labeling anyone else an "idiot." And like I care if you don't publish my comment.

Ben Cohen: You're welcome to comment here EzekialZ. You just hurl around a lot of accusations without knowing anything about me. I've followed Ron Paul for years and know all about him. I agree with him on many, many issues. But on this issue, he is being a dick. What's the problem? You're being a dick right now. I'm sure you're a cool guy when not posting on the internet (as I'd like to think I am).

EzekielZ: It was "Ron Paul is a Dick" in the headline, now it's just "on this issue, he is being a dick." Keep dialing it back, you're making progress. Did you or did you not vote for Obama twice? Don't tell me you're fighting for the above issues and then that you voted for Dictator Obama twice. That's as bad as voting for Bush or Romney. If you had a Ron Paul to vote for and you didn't then you didn't stand up when you had the chance.

Ben Cohen: Firstly, I'm not a US citizen, so I can't vote here. Secondly, Obama is not by any definition of the word a 'dictator'. Thirdly, if I could vote, I'd certainly not waste it on Ron Paul. Regardless of whether you agree with the concept of the modern industrial nation state (and I don't necessarily), if you implemented any of Paul's 'economic reforms' the country would collapse in about 3 seconds, along with the global economy. The thing is Ezekiel, you're an ideologue with no understanding of how the real world works. In your fantasy land, Ron Paul would sweep to power, dismantle the federal reserve, stop protecting America's industries, dismantle the state and, and everyone would flourish in a free market utopia. It's cuckoo land, and you're sadly too naive to understand it. Go to Somalia where they don't have a functioning government, and you'll see how well your economic theories work in practice.

I'd vote for Obama for tactical reasons as I believe he is pulling the country (slowly) onto a saner course and away from the disastrous neo con, free market madness of the Bush years. It's like shifting the Titanic - it simply can't be done quickly. Obama, despite his flaws, is at least an adult.

Anyway, I'm done arguing with you as you evidently see the world in absolutes and are incapable of debating seriously. Grow up.