Those Pesky Ron Paul Supporters

Why won't they just conform like the rest of the (mindless) Republicans?

The Boston Globe writes a decent synopsis of Ron Paul's "insurgent" supporters. From Nevada to Minnesota and beyond, Paul's fervent supporters refuse to silently conform to "established" Republican party principles.

It's funny, I have yet to meet someone who identifies himself as a John McCain supporter. Even Jonn, who's really just a bitter old man who's never read a FOX News, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, or Weekly Standard comment he didn't agree with, refuses to acknowledge McCain as a "strong" conservative...whatever that term means. I think today's definition of a strong conservative just means a steadfast commitment to American hegemony, and the above publications (as well as Jonn's angry website) serve as the hegemony's soap box.

Still, it's alarming to note the inconsistencies involved in the criticisms leveled at Dr. Paul by "strong" conservatives. On one hand, they like to call Paul a "racist, conspiracy-minded nutcase with no supporters and no real chance of winning" while on the other they fight vehemently to deny any discourse challenging Republican party principles when shutting down state conventions while complaining of a "Paul insurgency." Based on the inconsistencies above, Ron Paul truly has done the remarkable: simultaneously enjoyed no support and enough support to shut down state conventions.

And let's not address the issue of conformity as it pertains to these "strong" conservatives, either. For them, it's almost a unanimous "anybody but [Clinton/Obama]" mantra. The fact that the lesser of two evils is still evil doesn't faze them one bit, because what's important is picking a winner. That kind of rhetoric only adds fuel to the already strong argument against voting at all.