Characterizing the adherents of a political ideology as ‘extreme’ without offering any argument against the ideology itself is what they call ad hominem, and is among the lowest forms of discourse.

PS: Though it shouldn’t make any difference, I am not a libertarian, paleo-con, or anything else – I simply find this kind of attack distasteful. There are perfectly reasonable avenues of argument against Ron Paul’s platform, but none of them include the false premise of racism or extremism.

FWIW: I agree with everything you’ve said.

Please, if you are going to call someone names and condemn them, take the courtesy to get the points of condemnation actually correct. The man has hundreds of essays and House speeches published that you can read if you need to know what he believes and why so many people support him.

Just, please do some research before you bash with such reckless abandon.

Also, just because we are British, Windlab, doesn’t mean all of our readers are.

Obama is on to something, though, innit *Subtly brainwashes American readers*.”

That’s funny, because in our family here in the US we joke about the typical European multi-party systems as being a choice between the liberal party, the more-liberal party, the even-more-liberal party, and the communists. ;)

Obama, with his strangely “powerful” speaking style in which he appeals to people’s emotions without actually saying anything substantive, and the degree to which people swoon over him because of it (I’ve seen pics of morons literally crying after hearing one of his speeches), gives him a creepy, almost Hitlerian vibe to me. I certainly wouldn’t vote for him regardless, but that factor only reinforces my distaste.

The Guardian podcasts have to same problem of talking about the “Democrat party.” I know it’s unintentional, but it still creates a glitch in my brain when listening to an otherwise interesting newscast.

He’s a constitutional lawyer. He voted AGAINST the Iraq war. Hilary voted for it. I’m not a Democrat and I distrust all politicians in general, but the Republican party has made it clear that they are all either batsh*t crazy religious nutjobs, or just generally in favor of invading countries and killing people without end, especially brown people.

I knew the reasons given for the Iraq invasion were a complete fabrication. I was calling bullsh*t on Bush in 2002.

It was plainly obvious to anyone paying serious attention what was going on at the time, and I have little sympathy for the excuses of people like Hilary Clinton who do whatever is politically convenient at the time, and then play the fool later on.

If you voted for the Iraq war you fit into 3 groups:

1. Was not paying attention – your political career should end and you should never again be allowed to hold political office or make decisions that affect the general public.

2. Was paying attention but didn’t care about the consequences – see #1

3. Was paying attention but thought it would be over quickly. – Idiot – see #1

BTW I’m a 20-something high school and college dropout. Wealthy Ivy Leaguers really have no fscking excuse.

I am a bit surprised, however, at how many donators checked ‘R’ in the party box, though I wonder if that would have been the case had Ron Paul not been running. The number of Ron Paul supporters is unsurprising (what with his successful internet campaign, which technological types like game developers would certainly be exposed to,) but other than that I was expecting the industry to work out more like Hollywood with all ‘D’s. I suspect the Democratic parties’ enthusiastic support for censorship/limitations on game content (including, amongst others, Leland Yee, Hillary Clinton, Rod Blagojevich, and Joe Lieberman) played a part in this.

Obama is on to something, though, innit *Subtly brainwashes American readers*.

As a Canadian, I have to admit I always find it funny to look at what people from the U.S. consider ‘right’ or ‘left’ wing. It all looks like extreme-right to us (using the Royal We).

Ha, I agree. On another forum someone stated they didn’t like McCain’s chances because he’s not right-wing enough for many Republicans.

I thought, only in America would John McCain be considered “not right-wing enough”.