Willisms
Navigation

Buy WILLisms

XML Feed


Featured Entries

The Babe Theory Of Political Movements.
Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM

Iran's Sham Election In Houston.
June 20, 2005 5:36 AM

Yes, Kanye, Bush Does Care.
Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM

Health Care vs. Wealth Care.
Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM

Americans Voting With Their Feet.
Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM

Idea Majorities Matter.
May 12, 2006 6:15 PM

Twilight Zone Economics.
Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM

The "Shrinking" Middle Class.
Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM

From Ashes, GOP Opportunities.
Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM

Battle Between Entitlements & Pork.
Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM

Let Economic Freedom Reign.
Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM

Biggest Health Care Moment In Decades.
July 25, 2007 4:32 PM

Unions Antithetical to Liberty.
May 28, 2008 11:12 PM

Right To Work States Rock.
June 9, 2008 12:25 PM



Donate





Links

Blogroll Me!







Search



Archives

July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004




Social Security Reform Thursday.
March 13, 2008

Caption Contest: Enter Today!
Due: July 29, 2008

The Carnival Of Classiness.
Mar. 14, 2006

Quotational Therapy: Obama.
Apr. 4, 2008

Mainstream Melee: Wolfowitz.
May 19, 2007

Pundit Roundtable: Leaks.
July 9, 2006

A WILLisms.com(ic), by Ken McCracken
July 14, 2006




Credits

Powered by Movable Type 3.17
Site Design by Sekimori




WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy):











The WILLisms.com Gift Shop: Support This Site

giftshopbanner.gif











This Week's Carnival of Revolutions: carnivalbutton.gif



Carnival Home Base: homebase.gif

























Willisms

« Wednesday Caption Contest: Part 116 | WILLisms.com | With All Due Haste »

Ron Paul Sucks!

Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks guaranteed way to get traffic Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul SucksRon Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul SucksRon Paul Sucks Ron Paul SucksRon Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks

Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks Ron Paul Sucks

Posted by Ken McCracken · 8 August 2007 09:33 PM

Comments

Yawn

Posted by: joshuabrucel at August 8, 2007 11:57 PM

Hee!

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 9, 2007 12:01 AM

Thanks for the good publicity!
(Any publicity is GOOD!)

Now about 1,000 more people will know who Ron is... heh

Posted by: NH at August 9, 2007 12:25 AM

No, the Ron Paul blogger trolls will know where this site is so that they can stroll by and cut and paste their template comments here.

Do you get paid by the Ron Paul campaign? Do you post from the same IP with multiple different names to amplify Ron Pauls alledged legions of supporters?

Prob-bly...

Posted by: Justin B. at August 9, 2007 12:31 AM

Ron Paul... isn't he a Nationally recognized Pollster? I don't get it... are his polls biased or something?

Posted by: Mr Michael at August 9, 2007 01:44 AM

YARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

SURRENDER YE BOOTY!


Ron Paul ain't payin' us so we're resortin' to pi-ra-cy ....

Posted by: bret at August 9, 2007 05:37 AM

Ron Paul...? Is he the inventor of the Ginzu knife?

Posted by: zsa zsa at August 9, 2007 06:19 AM

wow, I am so impressed with your high degree of intelligent commentary. You must feel a sense of pride that is only exceeded by your hubris.

Posted by: shrugged at August 9, 2007 06:23 AM

Dear Ron Paul supporters; get a good look at what intelligence supports the other candidates. Ron Paul has to win!!!!! They are now pulling from elementary school to try and divert attention away
from real issues.

Posted by: Flo at August 9, 2007 07:09 AM

This post got a 2.5 hour response time from the RonPaulbots. That's longer than I would expect.

Has RonPaul cracked the 3% recognition barrier yet in national polls?

Idiots...

Posted by: Hoodlumman at August 9, 2007 08:15 AM

I thought you banned Jadegold--and now you're letting him post comments!

Posted by: Nathan Hale at August 9, 2007 10:02 AM

This post got a 2.5 hour response time from the RonPaulbots.

It was posted at 9:30 at night.

I suggest a scientific experiment of multiple posts at different times and measurement of how long it takes to get 3 RP trollbots to respond. Preferably posted earlier in the day.

Posted by: Justin B. at August 9, 2007 10:21 AM

How original. Why does he suck? This will probably be in your next informative article.
The truth is that RON PAUL RULES!!!!

Posted by: Dana Gabriel at August 9, 2007 10:23 AM

It isn't Ron Paul that sucks, as much as his goons.

You guys really suck.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 9, 2007 12:20 PM

Dangit Ken. Now I can't use that idea to drum up hits on my site.

How many hits did it get you, incidentally? Although I don't suppose the RonPaulBots click ads eh?

Posted by: k2aggie07 at August 9, 2007 12:29 PM

Well it's not even midafternoon yet and we have a thousand or so views.

Build it, and they will come.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 9, 2007 01:26 PM

How about, "Ron Paul inhales vigorously!"?

Posted by: Bigfoot at August 9, 2007 01:51 PM

No, You suck, you stupidhead! (I'm 5 years old, too)

Posted by: John Galt at August 10, 2007 06:03 AM

No, You suck, you stupidhead! (I'm 5 years old, too)

Posted by: John Galt at August 10, 2007 06:04 AM

Who is John Galt? Great book, though I don't think many fans would support Ron Paul.

Posted by: k2aggie07 at August 10, 2007 10:07 AM

Oops! Sorry about my comment. It should have read,

"I thought you banned Jadegold--and now you're letting him post main entries!"

Posted by: Nathan Hale at August 10, 2007 07:47 PM

Is this joe liebermans blog? why would you feel strongly enough about a nice old guy like ron paul to dedicate a ridiculous mean spirited topic to him?

The only reason i can guess is you are some kind of "big government" conservative.

Posted by: lester at August 10, 2007 08:21 PM

Not your finest hour.

Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot at August 10, 2007 10:07 PM

"Why does he suck?"

I don't think this so much of a question of "Why does he suck?," but what is he sucking on?

In today's political world, that word could be applied to any politician who puts so much red meat on the table with their political and ideological views. And I keeping insisting that Paul may not be a bad person, but in reality, his ideas are about a 9.5 on the suckometer.

If you really dislike Ron Paul, I think the conservative Republicans should use Ron Paul as a standard for how does his ideology different from any of the front-running dimocrats.

Posted by: Eneils Bailey at August 11, 2007 10:11 AM

his ideology is 100% different from the democrats. He's pro lifee, pro border fence/ wall, he has voted against more spending bills than anyone. he's wants to leave the UN. He voted for clintons impeachemnt and against kosovo. He's the polar opposite of democrats, most of whom voted FOR the war. He has the most conservative voting record ever.

Posted by: lester at August 11, 2007 01:39 PM

Lester, I guess you didn't get this, but . . . this post was much more about Ron Paul's goons and their overcaffeinated presence on the web than it is about Ron Paul himself.

Hell, back in my libertarian days I helped campaign for Paul, but that was nearly 20 years ago.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 11, 2007 09:54 PM

so what changed to make You decide a three trillion dollar budget was something you support?

Posted by: lester at August 12, 2007 11:25 AM

Well Lester, when did you stop beating your wife?

What makes you think I support a 'three trillion dollar budget?'

What, are you saying that anyone who does not support Ron Paul automatically supports a bloated federal budget?

I hope you aren't serious about that.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 12, 2007 07:19 PM

I meant in general, what made you shift from being a libertarian to being a republican?

i' m not a member of the libertarian party. I'm just anti spending period. To me, the federal government is like AOL: there's no reason to have it anymore, if there ever was.

Posted by: lester at August 12, 2007 07:26 PM

I am not a libertarian anymore because they have no chance at winning. One reason for that is because they cannot even agree on what their first principles are.

When I became a Republican I thought that one of the first principles of being a Republican is dedication to smaller government. Of course I have been let down time and time again by the Republicans on this, but at least they pay lip service to that principle. But I also disagree vehemently with the libertarian idea that can just be Fortress America, be completely non-interventionist in the world, and hide behind two oceans. That may have worked great in the 19th century, but it is pollyanna now.

I am heartened to see that you are anti-spending Lester, I am glad we agree on that.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 12, 2007 09:47 PM

well, we spend alot of that on the military. all of which, excpet maybe the coast guard, I am opposed to.

So we have one disagreement but it's a big one. I, like Dr Paul, would like to bring all the american soldiers around the world home. permenently. war is the health of the state and I am first and foremost anti state.

Posted by: lester at August 13, 2007 12:06 PM

also

http://www.mises.org/story/2656

Posted by: lester at August 13, 2007 12:11 PM

Ah, so you aren't really anti-spending, just anti-military.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 13, 2007 07:24 PM

Here's something interesting: the results of the Iowa straw poll:

1. Mitt Romney - 4516 votes, 31%
2. Mike Huckabee - 2587 votes, 18.1%
3. Sam Brownback - 2192 votes, 15.3%
4. Tom Tancredo - 1961 votes, 13.7%
5. Ron Paul - 1305 votes, 9.1%
6. Tommy Thompson - 1,009 votes, 7.3%
7. Fred Thompson - 231 votes
8. Rudy Giuliani - 183 votes
9. Duncan Hunter - 174 votes
10. John McCain - 101 votes
11. John Cox - 41 votes

My man Tancredo is in at #4; Ron Paul is right behind him at #5. Your highly-rated debaters, Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, are down at #8 and #10, respectively.

Yes, it's a straw poll; yes, the polling sample is small and possibly biased. But perhaps it's food for thought?

Posted by: Nathan Hale at August 14, 2007 01:35 AM

ken- I'm anti spending INCLUDING the military and especially war

Posted by: lester at August 14, 2007 12:00 PM

Incidentally, after his poor showing, Tommy Thompson has gotten out of the race. If only all those below him would follow suit....

Posted by: Nathan Hale at August 15, 2007 10:25 PM

it would be funny if they ALL quit. Sometimes I get the feeling they want to. Also, Sam Brownback will be played by Will ferrel in the movie version of this campaign

Posted by: lester at August 16, 2007 11:54 AM

Oh yeah, as if politicians, all of them completely driven by ego, would quit!

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 16, 2007 06:54 PM

Well, before the money runs out, anyway.

Posted by: Ken McCacken at August 16, 2007 06:54 PM

what if no one ran for president. or public office? That would be ideal

Posted by: lester at August 17, 2007 03:31 PM