The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: reply

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: As a long time member... (see in situ)


I understand what you mean about the way he presents himself; it *does* turn some people off, but the flip side is that others embrace it. The chicken little spiel does get old after a bit, but given our current fear-based MSM, he doesn't seem that much more..."excitable" than say, Savage or Kristol.

I'm still not seeing how he himself is a liability, though. Maybe if I knew who this "we" was, it'd help clarify things. But that's just it-- there is no "we", each of us can only be held responsible for ourselves. (Speaking of which...yeah the Piers rant did get a little over the top)

If someone gets turned off to the ideals of liberty or whatever else simply because of AJ, is that AJ's fault, or the person who made the decision? On the reverse, is it AJ's fault when someone begins embracing liberty/Constitution/what have you because of listening to him?

As far as this being chess, perhaps to those who are attempting to work with(in) the system, but not everyone is choosing that route. I respect your opinion on AJ, though, and thanks for the civil response.

A signature used to be here!