I was actually thinking of doing a serious post about Ron Paul. However briefly, I pondered preparing a scholarly inquiry into why it is that he’s the very definition of a crank. In the piece, I would link to his greatest hits, like that time he said our government would conjure up a Gulf of Tonkin incident to justify an invasion of Iran. It would have been an encyclopedic look into why Paul is a hero to groups like the John Birch Society. It was going to be a decisive triumph, a definitive smackdown that would show one and all that while Ron Paul does have his fans, Paul devotees, like their hero, reside firmly on the lunatic fringe.

But, as you may have deduced from the above graphic, this article will not be the Ron Paul-debunking monograph that I was contemplating. The following thoughtful email made me do a 180 degree turn on the matter:

You neocon filth. According to the viewers, the bullying would-be Mafia-don Guiliani sought
to huff-and-puff Paul's TRUTH off the stage, but the Republcian (sic) establishment (!!!) hot air isn't going to succeed this time.

The only thing you guys have to offer is hot air. We'll recylce (sic) all you idiotic treasonous anti-american (sic) neocon (sic) filth with every election.

As other bloggers who intrepidly delved into the subject of Ron Paul and his missing screw have discovered, this is more or less par for the course for communiqués from Paul supporters. Actually, this is one of the more literate efforts I received, and perhaps the only one that didn’t have multiple obscenities.

I also decided that doing a serious post on Ron Paul would be tantamount to answering a question that no one was asking. Other than his 83 followers across the nation who seem to have nothing better to do than send angry missives when someone has the audacity to question their hero, the rest of the country is completely indifferent to the daffy Congressman.

I WANT TO MAKE A SPECIAL NOTE of a critique filed by longtime HughHewitt.com bete noire Andrew Sullivan. Andrew wrote:

The conservative pundits are now referring to Ron Paul as a "crackpot." Hannity predictably savaged him last night (see above). The Hewitt site has an image of a man in a tin-foil hat; Dean Barnett and Hugh Hewitt both call for removing Paul from the debates, when he has been the best thing about them so far. Bill Benett wants him out. I'm getting the usual ridicule for taking him seriously from the usual GOP apparatchiks. They're scared, aren't they? The Internet polls show real support for him.

In response to Andrew’s sole justifiable complaint, we’ve upgraded and improved our tinfoil hat image. I hope everyone appreciates the effort. Regarding Paul’s successes in the internet polls, this shows only his followers’ a) Lack of lives; and b) Willingness to cheat. For a look at how to cheat on an internet poll, click here. Charles at LGF has caught the Paul followers red handed and has given them the boot.

As for anyone being afraid of Ron Paul, this is a tired and ridiculous trope. The only people afraid of Ron Paul are the children who live in his neighborhood who probably live in mortal fear of losing their baseball in old Dr. Paul’s yard and having to endure a 30 minute lecture on Washington’s Farewell Address as the price for getting it back.

My real reason for forgoing a serious piece on Ron Paul is anyone outside his adoring lunatic fringe who heard of him before last month knows he’s bonkers. Strict constructionism and original intent are fine things, but shoving every problem and every issue through the Founder’s Intent meat-grinder is lunacy. Besides, this rigid orthodoxy brings him down on what both Andrew and I consider to be the wrong side of the gay marriage question.

99% of the people who know the real Ron Paul story agree that he’s cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. While it’s true that I am not a particularly busy man, I would denigrate my own worth if I actually devoted my time to educating the other 1%.

Besides, I think the PhotoShop says it better than words possibly could.

Compliments? Complaints? Contact me at Soxblog@aol.com