Newshoggers Comments
Are you really that upset because of a comment someone left? Really? Should I write the papers and cry about the Obama fan that parked his BMW in my driveway and had a 4-hour picnic in my front yard? It happened last month. There was no harm, except for the pile of dog poop his pooch left in my yard, so I did not cry foul. I don't know if he thought this was his house or a commune or something but it's private property. I could have called the police for him trespassing but he seemed to be a decent guy so I just let it be and went about my day. I won't let one impolite fan turn me away from Obama though. If I criticize Obama it is for HIS politics. His support seems much more enthusiastic and real than that of Hillary Clinton.
If an RP fan were to come post a big Ron Paul sign in your front yard without asking I could understand getting a little upset. This is the internet though. Not every single off topic or unliked post is acceptable to label as spam. So what if a guy is trying to draw some more traffic to a somewhat related political discussion? Do you hate self-starters? It is not all that un-kosher to mention another discussion taking place especially when it is in the same topic area.
Yes, anything pro-Ron Paul is spam...
Right.
People who decide their candidate or who they support based on other supporters instead of the real issues deserve the government they get.
Not only is it silly to even ask people to police other people's comments, it's even dumber to believe it can be done. It's called freedom of speech, and there isn't anything anyone can do to make them stop outside of censorship.
However, what does need to change is for people such as yourself to quit trying to label entire groups of people based on the actions of a few. It is the samekind of thinking that brings racism and many other problems. And like it or not, that includes YOU.
Hm, is it censorship, or is it entirely appropriate for a blogger to complain about spam comments on her blog?
You be the judge!
(I'm going with "there are a lot of annoying people evangelizing for Ron Paul". Pointing that out might hurt your feelings, but I'm guessing you'll get over it.)
See here:
http://mvdg.wordpress.com/2007/1.../#comment-
33086
Since when is asking people to participate in a discussion about Ron Paul 'spamming'?
I'd say if not for Ron Paul your blog would be irrelevant and no one would ever have seen it..
Spam used to mean one sender sending to many receivers. Now the term has morphed to mean many senders sending to one receiver. Opps! It just morphed again to mean one sender supporting Ron Paul.
Intellectual perverts who are unable to refute Ron Paul's positions inevitably turn to smearing his support. The new definition of spammer is anyone supporting Ron Paul.
Oops! I misspelled oops.
Ron Paul supporters, police yourselves. If you want your man to have a fighting chance, you need to marginalize those among you who are casting him in a bad light. This apparently small group reflects badly on all of you.
Good lord, get over yourself.
I am a Ron Paul supporter and a longtime libertarian Republican.
The media, GOP, and many bloggers are surprised to see the vehement pro-Paul groundswell online.
I tend to agree with you that the wildly expressed passion of some naive kids and conspiracist kooks are hurting Paul's credibility.
However, for the more mature pragmatic Paul supporters among us, our hope is that once Paul's fundraising finally earns him the grudging respect of the skeptical media and party establishment -- and once we all realize that no pro-war GOP candidate has a prayer against Hillarobama -- then Ron Paul will actually get more of a chance to speak for himself.
Ron Paul is no Truther, nor a lunatic. He's not a compromiser, but he stands on his principles. He is a truly gentle, ethical man of conscience. And if that seems quaint in today's political life, then perhaps that's the root of our problem in this country. Let's not blame the horde of onetime apathetics who've suddenly woke up and found someone they can genuinely believe in.
So you're saying that Ron Paul supporters should NOT join in a discussion titled "Would you vote for Ron Paul?", or call other supporters to join in too? I kinda thought that's what campaigning for ones chosen candidate was all about...
Calling in the troops to turn a blog "how to get rid of your tapeworms" into a Ron Paul campaign blog, THAT is spamming.
I think there are quite a few people missing a big point here. This isn't a Ron Paul blog. It has never been a Ron Paul blog. The post the original comment was left on wasn't even about Ron Paul. Our comments policy (see sidebar) says we don't like to see such off-topic commenting. To me, that's just plain rude and fits the definition fo spam.
You know, this is our site and we have the right to apply our own commenting rules. When I can bring my biker pals over for a lua on your lawn, you can come here and push your agenda in off-topic comments. If you don't like that, tell it to a mammal who cares or go find a blog more to your taste.
Regards, C
As I said, this blog should be put on ignore...
I dont see Ron Paul supporters telling me how to enlarge my penis or buy cheap viagra ot teiing me that they need my help to transfer a fortune out of Nigeria... That's spam, not talking about what people are talking about.
I like Ron Paul. I will no doubt vote for him even if I have to write him in.
Pardon us for wanting to spread the word about someone who can save our country....
Cernig's post was about Obama and made an important point about the NPT. The Ron Paul invite that appeared in comments at the post did not address that point at all but merely issued a call to arms for RP supporters to go flock to some discussion. That's appropriate for a RP forum board, not a blog post on a blog that has no affiliation with the campaign. If it had been left at the post I had done previously that DID relate to Ron Paul, I wouldn't have had a problem with it. It would be relevant. By hitting the post at the top it's clear the commenter was engaging in self-promotion and didn't have enough respect for our work to even read what he was linking to. If you show no respect, don't expect to receive any in return.
The comments here are a perfect example of the larger problem of supporters who are just spoiling for a fight.
J Cline gets it. He's an example of most of the supporters I've had personal contact with. They actually read and respond to what was actually said. If they were all, or even mostly like that I wouldn't complain.
The posters like NH4 who just want to start a fight, and boast of his imagined influence and thus what he apparently he feels is his right to dictate what I post, is what is hurting Paul's credibility. By all means, he should put me on his ignore list.
Commenters like John Coffee who are at least polite aren't as destructive, but one suspects he's being deliberately obtuse in failing to grasp the point. I hate to think his reading comprehension is simply that poor because again, it reflects badly on the candidate if his supporters appear to be unable to grasp context.
I address Paul's campaign, not only here but also at Detroit News and The Impolitic, because I care about widening the field of candidates who get a voice. The posts have basically been positive about the candidate, If I'm overrun by irritating posts bitching about what I didn't say, and also get self-absorbed commenters who seem to think they can use someone's blog as a bulletin board to promote their own unrelated interests, then I'm just going to start ignoring RP along with most everyone else. It's just not worth the irritation.
And Tex, I don't say that because I'm full of myself. I don't think I'm so all fire important to his campaign. But a candidate who depends on the internet for exposure, probably doesn't want to alienate the polibloggers in general and I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. I offer it up in the spirit of trying to help the sensible supporters out.
Take if for what it's worth, or ignore it if you think it worth nothing. It matters little to me, but one last word of advice to the overzealous supporters who take every criticism as a personal affront and a call to go into attack mode. You're only hurting yourselves and RP. If you can't take the criticism, you should get out of politics. It's no place for the thin skinned.
Face it, this person is spamming his own blog by using Ron Paul's popularity as a political football!
All the more reason to put it on ignore.
Crazy like a Fox, he/she doth protest too much!
Hah.
When people are as passionate about Ron Paul as I am post comments it is hard for us to talk of anything else. We have a true oppurtunity to turn this country aroun and are excited about that. There are going to be fans that are not polite and I apologize myself for thier words.
Peace, Liberty, sound good to me
Agreed. I support Ron Paul entirely, but so many times I feel hesitatant to promote him in circumstances any less than reasoned and intelligent debate.
The spamming does do some harm, in that it probably doesn't win anyone new onto his side to his side, and alienates the rest of the people who probably would be willing to hear the candidate out but for the insane amount of spam supporters dish out.
That being said, it's a internet community, and I do think that they have the right to be excited, and I'm glad they're motivated enough to campaign for him. They just need better methods.
The way I see the 'Ron Paul NetRoots Problem' is, as Leonard Read says, "a learning problem rather than a selling problem".
The message of liberty is new to many of the people supporting Ron Paul. For these It is somewhat difficult to stand on a pedistal and say "Listen to Me" and expect to make any real results in educuating or inspiring someone. It is best if the proponents of Dr. Paul and more so the message of liberty thorugh a free market, private ownership, limited government philosophy learn as much as they can about this seemingly long forgotten ideal. In doing so it will allow them to engage in intelligent debate about specific issues and possibly spark an interest in a positive way. One can never change one's mind if one's mind is not open to change. This usually requires inspiration and inspiration can not be obtained through force. So for Ron Paul-the man-to gain traction in a positive light among the people, it is nescessary for the American people in general, and the "spammers" in particular, understand Ron Paul-the idea-through learning and educating themselves and let the power of attraction work for liberty.
I myself am a supporter of Dr. Paul, and I certainly appreciate the zeal of many of the younger group of supporters. However, it is without question that many of that group wind up doing him- and, by extension, themselves- more harm than good by misrepresenting his views (ie, the 9/11 Truth crowd), and bringing his name into debates where it is irrelevant.
As a result of things like this, Rep. Paul winds up being decried as a kook by association. I know there are many people who heard about Rep. Paul for the first time in a manner such as this; as a result, they now forever associate Rep. Paul with that obnoxious interaction, and will treat everything that he says with an added degree of skepticism. My suspicion is that 75% of Republicans would agree with 90% of what Rep. Paul stands for; for other candidates, I suspect that only 25-50% of Republicans would agree with them on 90% of the issues. But because of this small but vocal minority of Paul fanatics (who, btw, often don't fully understand what he is about), most Republicans will never be able to associate him with anything but a couple of cheap slogans and very aggressive behavior. The incident involving Giuliani after the Michigan straw poll should be embarassing to anyone who wants to see Rep. Paul do well.
Sorry. You need to call a moron for what he is and not attribute it to a candidate. There are great people who support Ron Paul and a few idiots. Oh, and that happens with every candidate. Time to grow a thicker skin!
Actually, no. The Ron Paul campaign is hurt by illegitimate journalists such as yourself who attempt to compare the Man Ron Paul to the individual people who support him.
This country is filled with wild eyed crazy individuals and yes, of course some of them are going to support Ron Paul, just like some will support Romney and others the Dragqueen.
And really the only thing this does is chastise REGULAR AMERICAN people because they have passion towards an individual who will actually put this Country on a path of success as opposed to our current path of failure.
I'm sorry some fellow Paul supporters get a little overly-vocal. It annoys me sometimes too, because I feel it puts people off. As we try to get Ron's message to the host of voters who will start paying closer attention to the election, we need to present a passion that is tempered with intelligence and respect, and I hope that Paul supporters will master that. I am incredibly excited to have a man of Paul's integrity and message in the race, but I would never let that get to the point where I am actually putting off others from supporting him. That is self-defeating, no? Anyway, thanks for the neutral Ron Paul coverage--that is all any candidate deserves, and for a candidate with Paul's message, more then enough imo.
Jake, I don't have any problem with enthusiasm and if Alan had couched his comment in terms of Paul's position on the NPT, that would have helpful to the discussion and would have indicated he had bothered to read the post. I'd be happy to see that and I'd welcome informed comments to my posts on the candidate. I WANT to know what it is you love about this candidate. On the issues, not just that someone thinks he's peachy keen and want everyone to vote for him. I want to know why.
Zhou, Joe and Publius, thank you for your thoughtful comments. This is exactly the sort of response I always hope to elicit with these posts and I think you put in better context when you note it's aggressive, rather than merely zealous as I painted it. That's exactly what's so off putting about the bombardment if one so much as mentions RP name and I believe it's holding him back to a very real extent.
As Publius notes, that incident in Michigan was appalling and I have to think it was conducted by the same sort of "supporters" that flood blog posts with these aggressive comments. It doesn't help and I think the RP community needs to have a discussion about it. I believe the majority of Paul's supporters are more like you. If you want your guy to progress to the next level, then I think you need to either ask these guys to tone it down or disavow them and counter their presence with some kind of reasonable discourse.
I'll just go ahead and add to the overwhelming amount of "spam" that has already flooded this bunk blog. We've already heard the failed smear attempt about how RP's supporters are hurting him, which is a sad attempt at discrediting his enormous grassroots support. If there is any spam to be found, it is the post at the top by Libby Spencer. Libby, police yourself, and if we see any more smear pieces, we won't prop up this blog anymore.
Li, thank you for your encouragement.
A most excellent article that is made more so because it is exactly true. Even when one tries to be fair by attributing the counterproductive actions to a mad dog radical few, the socially-challenged netwits remain unappeased.
Regardless of the comments here, this doesn't appear to simply be a case of "everybody's doing it". This cult-like mania to trash any piece that isn't a Paul for President lube job seems to be a peculiar trait of zealous Paul supporters.
Maybe it helps explain why Dr. No has been unable to show more than 5% support in any non-manipulatable poll.
As you stated, after having had to deal with the boorishness, the temptation is to write or publish about Brazilian goat flies rather than Ron Paul.
All Ron Paul supporters are believers in our American Constitutionally validated "Freedom of Liberty" and noone is better individually than the other American patriot. We are ALL created EQUAL under the law of the land and it seems that the OMT =(Old Media Television)and Americas GREEDY politicians aren't liking it too much.
I am a RN for a LARGE conglomerated Hospital and I see so much wrong in government that I KNOW that DR. Ron Paul can remedy the situation without SOCIALIZED/MARXIST healthcare. Ron Paul is the peoples candidate!
I am a fan of going by the constitution for one thing. I would like to see habeas corpus reinstated.
Non interventious foreign policy is appealing aswell. Imagine all our troops in our own country. Not out policing anyone we deem as terrorist.
almost 4000 dead and many on their 3rd tour to Iraq. thousands of Iraqis dead most of which are civilian.
A few other things I agree with.
Sound money----- No Federal Reserve
No stealing-------No IRS
I agree with his stance to not nationally legalizing abortion.
I ask that others look seriously into the effect this could have on modern Gov.
We must be careful not to shed negative light on his campaign by forcing our views on others. Let them decide.
My opinion he sells himself.
Thank you,
Jake Wulf TN
According to Rudy's handlers, Rudy had fun in Michigan. Did you think the Paul supporters were going to hurt him? No, they were just hazing him a little. If Rudy can't take a little hazing, how is he going to take heat from OBL?
Paul's "grassroots problem" is actually a problem of another sort. He has annoyed the holy alliance that protects Israel's interests. Paul thinks the US should pursue its own interests in the middle east and in the world.
And that is heresy of the worst kind in the media temple as presided over by former AIPAC exec Wolf Blitzer.
Ron Paul could be right on every issue imaginable, but this one apostasy would never be permitted. The worst part of it is that many. many people agree with this, but dare not speak out. An "off the record" chat with congressmen would stun you. My view is not a minority view.
I support Ron Paul who supports the Constitution of the United States of America and is a TRUE PATRIOT and now that is called " Kooky". My Father in Heaven, I wish ALL politicians were "Kooky" then! As for the comment from the article...Well, just be glad that the 1st Amendment still is allowed. Give GWB and his henchmen much longer and I promise...IT WON'T!!! Ron Paul is the peoples candidate in 2008. 
Hi Libby,
Appreciate your comments, I think it may be boorishness, or unbridled enthusiasm, but it ain't "spam".
As for the incident on the ferry, from the footage it is apparent that Rude-y needs to get a thicker skin. If he had stopped to shake hands or talk with those folks, I think there might have been a much different dynamic there. Rudy, like his nemesis Hillary is deathly afraid to talk to people who are not his core audience because the more non-supporters get to know these two, the LESS they like them.
Anyway, thanks for the post and the tempered comments.
Ats? I am a christian and I serve Yahweh Elohim(Hebrew for the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and I can tell you right now that God does take care of His chosen 12 Tribes of Israel! Join the so called "minority" here and endorse the real american choice as I will most certainly be voting for him myself...Ron Paul of Texas!!!
"But word up, your man is being perceived as the kook candidate because of an overzealous fringe group and it's hurting his candidacy."
No, this is the fault of those making the statements and not the supporters. Guilt by association is a logical fallacy. Ron Paul is perceived as a 'kook' at sites like Red State, and Brown Shirt Republic because the opinion "leaders" at those sites do not like Paul's ideas and feel that he threatens the chances of the candidates they support.
Roody loved it, his campaign said so.
Hey NH4, I thought you were going to ignore this blog. Let me help you out with that...
Regards, C
Add me to the chorus of Ron Paul supporters who cringe at the comments made by some. It would be nice to think they're just agents provocateurs, but I've met too many in real life.
My sense is that all candidates have fringe-y, boorish supporters, but that as the candidate becomes more mainstream the ratio of reasonable-to-nutty increases (I have little doubt that Hillary has supporters demanding federal laws mandating veganism and living in mud huts) .
If I could offer a few words of advice to my fellow RP fans:
1) Don't copy/paste resonses especially when you don't actually address the article; it gains no new supporters and tends to piss off potential ones.
2) Don't treat every non-positve piece as an intentional hit-piece; reasonable people can disagree on things.
3) Counter critiques with reason and tact; one can correct errors of fact without demanding changes to opinion.
4) Ignore irrational and emotional baiting, ie. trolling, and don't engage in it yourself.
5) Be civil; pretend you're speaking face to face.
Word to Alex!
I think this particular thread should be required reading for all Ron Paul supporters, simply for the fact that it's a reasonable insight into why there is a certain degree of negativity from bloggers and pollers online.
For the bloggers who are weary of being jumped by RP zealots at every corner, please understand: many of the Paul supporters are new at this. Many are young, and college students often see the world in very black/white terms. Many supporters have never even had an interest in a political campaign before, so they don't know how to discuss in the accepted mode of the blogosphere.
Try to see the zealots in that context, Libby and Cernig, and it becomes easier to relate. It's actually really healthy to see greater engagement of a previously-disillusioned segment of American society: kids, independents, and truly conservative (not neocon) Repubs. Yes, of course there are people who say kooky things, but that may simply be the hyperbole of anonymity.
Forgive them, for they know not what they do. Don't judge the vast majority of rational, respectful Ron Paul supporters by the rude actions of a few. And certainly, don't prejudge the man himself!
Just to be clear, I am not judging the candidate or the community by a handful of nutty commenters but I'm a poli-junkie. I'm better informed than the average Jake who doesn't spend most of his waking hours reading about politics. The reality is that the average Jake who might want to know more about RP and stumbles onto a post through google and then sees a slew of combative comments that don't address the context of the post are going to be put off and probably not want to be associated with the campaign. In an era where haircuts and belly laughs take up the news cycle for days and weeks, unfortunately superficial impressions matter.
In any event I'm heartened by the number of thoughtful commenters that have showed up here. I knew you were out there. I think you need to make yourselves more visible to counter the bad impression that the combative commenters leave with the drive-by reader.
It's just my opinion. Take it or leave it as you will and thanks again to those who offered reasoned discussion on this thread.
Libby-
Thank you again for the rational, wonk-ish coverage. I do agree that the calmer portion of the RP supporters need to do a better job of policing the less calm portion. Unfortunately, there's a limit to what we can do since the 'net is huge and the calmer portion of RP supporters tends to be older and have jobs- so not much time to just troll random websites. I am going to try to be more vocal on my own blog, though, in distancing myself and RP from these more aggressive types. In the meantime, I would suggest that, in addition to my blog, there are a couple of other pro-RP blogs that are not above criticism of the aggressive elements. A few that come to mind are Area417 (despite the conspiratorial sounding name and site design, it's pretty non-conspiratorial)
Unqualified Offerings (highclearing.com)(highly recommended)
ToThePeople
North Buffalo Journal and Review
The Libertarian Guy(TM)
GMU Liberty&Power Group Blog (highly recommended)
FreeNY
I'm sure there are plenty of others, but those are ones I'm pretty familiar with. In any event, they all tend to have interests beyond Ron Paul 2008, but are still pretty clearly dedicated RP supporters. Point is, there are plenty of us out there.
I consider Libby a friend but am not altogether sure that the guy's "spam" warrented a whole topic.
We know people at all levels of the media detest us. less governemnt means less drama and less stuff to cover. what is the bloggosphere in 2007 but a training ground fo the next generation of well spoken hacks?
mutual respect is the key and something both sides of the ron vs not ron debate need to work on.
As long you don't know the commentator, how could you know, that he/she/it writes for Ron Paul?
For example on youtube there are so many idiotic videos tagged Ron Paul or with Ron Paul in title so I start to consider other campaign staff doing that.
both sides need to give the other leeway
First off I am a Ron Paul fan.
Second I can agree that making a comment in a thread that's not about Ron Paul to "Come over here and comment in this other blog about Ron Paul" is a bit of a stretch of civility. No it's not "spam" in the classical sense, but it was off topic.
Third to the blogger that's asking a 100% volunteer grassroots campaign flung across the Internet involving thousands of people who don't know each other to "police itself"...are you KIDDING? Can Hillary Clinton stop love sick female fan to post a youtube video saying she wished Hillary was a lesbian? There are people that push the bounds in EVERY campaign and if they aren't on the payroll there is no way to "police" them.
Fourth there is a way to handle such situations better. Maybe the Ron Paul fan should have at least said something about Ron Paul's view on nuclear proliferation before giving the link to the "Would you vote for Ron Paul" discussion. And I'm not saying that to "police" anyone. It's just a friendly suggestion.
Libby, No I do not spend every waking hour pouring over politics. Like many out there this is the first time I have participated in such a discussion. I am passionate about Paul's message and think he would do an incredible amount of good.
Commenting by HaloScan
