“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Ron Paul maybe wont win, but if this is the accurate description of our natural tendencies in dealing with a new, conflicting element interacting with the established structure, the author is operating clearly on the ridicule stage. I believe the point Ghandi made is that those who ignore, ridicule and fight do more to strengthen and unite the cause. What you can take out of his quate is simply that these people, these groups, can only be fragmented by sound logic.

I think your basic fascist ideology is showing, Rog.

Especially without any specific foundational attack identified, especially with mainly opinion proferred in support of the assertion.

Yes, I’m aware of what the courts over the years have done to strict constructionism. I abhor it, and want my president to appoint strict constructionalists only. I don’t see how anyone could hate more than I do the damage done by liberal-activist judges.

But you guys are skating perilously close to fetishizing the word, the symbol, of the Constitution as some sort of iconic holy totem, rather than the rolled-up-sleeves working plan of the American experiment.

I don’t want to be governed from an altar, by a self-proclaimed priesthood channeling a holy relic.

I know, this complaint is strictly atmospheric –but it’s real, and I object to the meme the same way I object to Jim Bakker’s Bible-thumping.

Yes, it’s a grinding, long-term, maddening project. But many apprise the alternative as an irresponsible dice throw, for the luxury of looking the other way, if possible, for as long as we can, yet again –even to the point of minimizing and poo-pooing the insanely, mortally destructive attack on us, the effort to decapitate our military, civilian, and financial headquarters, back just a few years ago.

Look, get out your maps. Look at the Persian Gulf. There’s at least one Muslim armed force that could put ole Red’s town out of business in a heartbeat, just by taking control of the Straits of Hormuz. And that’s just for starters. What does Ron Paul say about that, inquiring minds want to know.

No, I’m not ringing alarm bells that we’re doomed. What I am trying to say is that the wrong president can do huge harm to the national interests.

Have you ever studied the Carter presidency, viz the middle east?

How things that Carter did–with the best of intentions perhaps, but things he cooked up in his own mind much as Mr. Paul gives the impression of doing–are still to this day damaging the world?

Look at how the current war began –in 1979 with the jihadi toppling of the Shah, aided & abetted by a little abstraction-hypnotized self-righteous zealot from Plains, Georgia, who had somehow got hisself elected President of the United States.

Lastly, you seem to think that nothing past today counts. If USA won’t be in thrall to jihadi zealotry by, y’know, 5:00 pm, then what’s the worry?

Well, some of us –esp those of us with kids –are trying to look down the road 10 or 50 years. We’re still not sure we’re gonna survive Carter, much less another of the sort taking over in 2008.

All due respect, of course, to your emphatic and obviously sincere views.

“The nutballs have arrived.”

Wow. That was a really intelligent reply. I’m proud of you.

All,

Jumping up and down and stamping your feet and repeating mantra like “fringe … blah blah … extremist … blah blah … won’t work … blah blah … real world … blah blah” is not an intelligent and coherent argument.

Following the Constitution is NOT OPTIONAL. When do you boys think it became optional? Are some parts optional and some parts not? Which parts?

It is an extremely sad commentary that what masquerades as “conservatism” these days thinks actually following the Constitution is a “fringe” position. If you don’t support following the Constitution, then I don’t see how you can call yourself a conservative with a straight face. What exactly are you trying to conserve? Certainly not the Old Republic.

Please, I really would like to know. When did following the Constitution become optional? 1865? 1913? 1933? 9/11/01? When?

Also, anyone is welcome to answer my question above about how the US is going to come to be under “Muslim domination” if we are not over there fighting aggressive wars. Work that out for me. Is terrorism alone going to do that? Which navy and air force in the Middle East is going to get that done?

Perhaps a even better analogy for the Ron Paul crowd than the Weinstein Bros. would be The Velvet Underground. The saying was that hardly anyone saw the Velvet Underground back in the sixties, but everyone who did eventually started a band. Not many people will end up voting for Ron Paul, but everyone who will has a blog, or posts frequently on one.

Ron Paul sounds to me not so much a libertarian as a paleoconservative. A total lost cause electorally, but somewhat interesting intellectually. Whatever you say about them Buddy and Bostonian, you can’t accuse them of not caring about the survival of western civilization.

(& thanks, Barrett –same back atcha!)