Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
February 10, 2013
Link

Statistics

Replies: 312

Ron Paul calling in the UN waaaaaahmbulance

:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 10, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
"Earlier today, Ron Paul filed an international UDRP complaint against RonPaul.com and RonPaul.org with WIPO, a global governing body that is an agency of the United Nations. The complaint calls on the agency to expropriate the two domain names from his supporters without compensation and hand them over to Ron Paul.

...

Last month, after Ron Paul expressed regret on the Alex Jones show over not owning RonPaul.com (in an interview titled “Ron Paul: The Internet Is Our Last Chance to Awaken America“), dozens of supporters urged us to contact Ron Paul to work out a deal.

We sent Ron Paul the following respectful offer, explaining that we’d prefer to keep RonPaul.com due to reasons explained in our letter. At the same time we offered him RonPaul.org as a free gift so we could keep using RonPaul.com and he wouldn’t have to use something like RonPaulsHomePage.com.

Incredibly, Ron Paul’s lawyers are trying to use our FREE offer of RonPaul.org against us in an attempt to demonstrate “bad faith” on our part! Our offer went on to explain that in case Ron Paul insisted on obtaining RonPaul.com, we would prepare a complete liberty package consisting of RonPaul.com and our 170k mailing list.

The value we put on the deal was $250k; we are getting our mailing list appraised right now but we are confident it is easily worth more than $250k all by itself. Claims that we tried to sell Ron Paul “his name” for $250k or even $800k are completely untrue, and there is little doubt that our mailing list would have enabled Ron Paul to raise several million dollars for the liberty movement this year. It would have been a win/win/win situation for everyone involved.

Instead of responding to our offer, making a counter offer, or even accepting our FREE gift of RonPaul.org, Ron Paul went to the United Nations and is trying to use its legal process related to domain name disputes to actively deport us from our domain names without compensation."

And now for the really funny part:

"Back in 2007 we put our lives on hold for you, Ron, and we invested close to 10,000 hours of tears, sweat and hard work into this site at great personal sacrifice. We helped raise millions of dollars for you, we spread your message of liberty as far and wide as we possibly could, and we went out of our way to defend you against the unjustified attacks by your opponents. Now that your campaigns are over and you no longer need us, you want to take it all away – and send us off to a UN tribunal?"

[link]

Basically, Ron Paul is opposed to the UN (and any kind of governmental body larger than a bread box because it "infringes on our sovereignty") until the day comes when he needs them to do something for him. You know, something like throwing a portion of his fan base under the bus.

Seems legit.
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:icondevine-consciousness:
devine-consciousness Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2013
i love rannn paul
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
He rannnn for president so many times that I think he confused himself.
Reply
:icondevine-consciousness:
devine-consciousness Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2013
ehh i think he just would never be allowed to be president because he's the only one who is honest and tells the truth.
All that president crap is iffy and i don't believe a second of it. All i know is that ron paul is the only genuine honest guy i've seen up on the stage in my life time.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Mar 4, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Lawlz.
Reply
:iconbohobella:
bohobella Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
That's hilarious. Although why does RonPaul.com want to keep the .com so much? I guess it says a lot about me, but if I ran someone's fanclub and they said they wished they had that name, I'd give it to them. Not that his actions are in any way justified over a web domain.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 22, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
The free market principles which he makes lip service to demand that he buy the domain as intellectual property, not to mention the sizable mailing list. The fact that he'd rather have the UN confiscate it should tell us a lot about his true philosophy as opposed to the one his followers have ate up.
Reply
:iconsheepy94:
Sheepy94 Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Student General Artist
Please wait one moment while I go laugh my ass off in the corner.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
That is permitted.
Reply
:icontbschemer:
TBSchemer Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013
How about this: I'll register defaultking.com, start posting some of these items [link] there, ask for donations on the site, and then offer to sell you the domain for $250,000.

Does that seem legit?
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist
Then you would be guilty of copyright infringement and could possibly have to pay thousands of dollars per infringement. Plus whatever profits you made.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
The main difference being that I already have Creative Commons licenses for everything I've posted here, but Ron Paul has never once taken out any sort of copyright on his name or appearance. Whereas my claim would be a no-brainer victory for me, Dr Paul's has fewer legs than that Gadsden Flag snake you guys like to wave around.
Reply
:icontbschemer:
TBSchemer Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013
BUT I COULD PUT MY HEART AND SOUL AND TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HOURS INTO COPYING YOUR ART AND MAKING A PROFIT OFF OF IT AND THAT SHOULD MEAN SOMETHING AND YOURE JUST CALLING THE WAAAAAAHMBULANCE BY TRYING TO ENFORCE YOUR COPYRIGHTS.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Too bad I have a copyright and Ron Paul doesn't.
Reply
:icontbschemer:
TBSchemer Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013
Yet he has a trademark.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
I'd ask you to show me the trademark, but you couldn't show it to the other five or so people who've asked for it so I guess I'll have to pass on that one.
Reply
:icontbschemer:
TBSchemer Featured By Owner Feb 17, 2013
Show me the registration for your copyright. What? You don't have any paperwork for it? Then it must not exist.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 17, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
It's registered with DeviantArt, which is more proof than Ron Paul has for his so-called copyright on his name and "brand". I filled out a Creative Commons form for each of my submissions, but he's never done anything of the kind as far as any research into copyright databases can show. Fail analogy is fail.
Reply
:icongussiejives:
gussiejives Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Sweet delicious irony.  I don't know what's funnier, the running to the UN with a UDRP, or that he's going after those who supported him.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
They're both pretty funny when taken individually, but the combined irony just kinda compounds on itself like a fractal made of lulz.
Reply
:iconvisionoftheworld:
VISIONOFTHEWORLD Featured By Owner Feb 14, 2013
What I want to know is how much of our tax dollars are funding his lawyers to go cry to the europeans. Because I don't support one dime paying for this man and his fascist ideology. People like him have no place in our government.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 14, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
It's apparent that the American electorate agrees with you, given how many times Ron Paul has lost.
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013
I must admit I'm suprised. I've never been much of a fan of Ron Paul's policies but I did respect the fact he seemed consistent in his views and wouldn't pander to the majority. This shows he's no different to any other politician though. Will happily promote action that disadvantages people as long as he's not disadvantaged by it, then suddenly it's fine to use.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
It kinda reminds me of Ayn Rand calling Social Security degrading but collecting it regardless...
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist
Forgot to mention she collected it under a false name...
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Do you file your taxes as Taco Steev?

(Hint: Ayn Rand was a pseudonym. She collected her benefits under her real name.)
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist
I know Ayn Rand was her pen name, but she collected social security under the name "Ann O'Connor" which isn't her legal name.
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Yes it is, or rather was, as a result of marrying a man whose name happened to be Frank O'Connor, and changing her last name to match his, as is customary in much of the West.
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist
I know who she married. Her first name is not Ann though (birth or legal).
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Ah, you're right. *Shrug* However, her social security payouts were in fact to Alice O'Connor, not Ann.
Reply
(2 Replies)
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Wouldn't want to hurt the brand, now would she?
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist
Do as I say not as I do.
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
You forgot to mention that the government paid her hospital bills for cancer.

Of course, neither case is actually hypocrisy, but what does it matter what people actually say or believe, when it's so much easier just to make something up that seems like something they might say (or believe), and accuse them of hypocrisy for not adhering to your fantasies.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
No, I accuse them of hypocrisy for not adhering to their own fantasies. After all, self-reliance is only important for others, or for yourself until you actually need someone else's help. Right...
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
As a general rule of thumb, when you start telling somebody else what they believe, you should probably check yourself.

This is a tired rehashing of an old progressive meme: Well, if you oppose collecting taxes, you shouldn't drive on roads paid for by them. It's the idea that if government nationalizes all the farms, those who oppose the action should starve to death.

Ayn Rand's actual words on people collecting Social Security:

"It is obvious, in such cases, that a man receives his own money which was taken from him by force, directly and specifically, without his consent, against his own choice. Those who advocated such laws are morally guilty, since they assumed the “right” to force employers and unwilling co-workers. But the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration."

and

"The victims do not have to add self-inflicted martyrdom to the injury done to them by others... Whenever the welfare-state laws offer them some small restitution, the victims should take it... The same moral principles and considerations apply to the issue of accepting social security, unemployment insurance or other payments of that kind."

The fantasy of Ayn Rand: "Those who collect any benefit from the government is a parasite!"
The reality of Ayn Rand: "You should utilize programs and advantages government offers even as you oppose the existence of these programs and advantages."

*Shrug* But hey, continue with your ignorant crusades. It's kind of entertaining, like watching creationists debate.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
"It is obvious, in such cases, that a man receives his own money which was taken from him by force, directly and specifically, without his consent, against his own choice. Those who advocated such laws are morally guilty, since they assumed the right' to force employers and unwilling co-workers. But the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration."

Where's the force? I've never had the Social Security police bang on my door in the middle of the night and say "Alright, son, time to pay up."


"The victims do not have to add self-inflicted martyrdom to the injury done to them by others... Whenever the welfare-state laws offer them some small restitution, the victims should take it... The same moral principles and considerations apply to the issue of accepting social security, unemployment insurance or other payments of that kind."

And what if I don't go around all day suffering from a victim complex over something that'll eventually pay me back my own money? I guess that makes me a sheeple...
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Hey, you're just jealous because her books actually sold well, and you're having to pimp yours in a forum signature just to get people to look at it.

The above statement isn't intended as a serious attack, incidentally, merely as like-minded treatment of you, equal to the treatment you're granting your ideological enemies. If you want to debate ideas, I am of course open to that, but if you're merely interested in mocking people you don't understand, then the above statement is really all that can be added to your style of "debate." It's all you have offered, you see.

*Shrug* Your choice. You can grow up, or you can continue to live in a world in which you can only meaningfully communicate with people whose ideas don't differ from your own, because everybody else finds your "charming" combination of ignorance and arrogance rather off-putting.

I could try to psychoanalyze you, if you want. Let's see... you don't think you're arrogant, because you occasionally indulge in a bit of self-effacing humor - you probably didn't even take my attack particularly personally, and would have joked in response had I left it as-is. You regard ego as delusion even as you wrap your ego around your interactions with others and call it by another name; you are more put-off by the fact that I find you arrogant than that I insulted your book. Blah blah blah, artist, grand insight into the human soul, cultivates an outward personality of ironically serious non-seriousness, craves approval more than success, stuck in a low-status job - do you make coffee, perchance? - and trying desperately to find some subgroup you can be high-status in. Or I could be entirely wrong, I wouldn't put any money on any of this bullshit. I am after all trying to judge you by a few dozen paragraphs written in a politics forum and a tiny pixelated avatar.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Not really. I'm no more jealous of Ayn Rand than I am of Stephanie Meyer; partially because I understand that popularity doesn't necessarily indicate quality, but also because both are essentially peddling shoddily-constructed rape fantasies, replete with poor characterization and exalted as literature by only the most dedicated of fanboys/girls.

Now onto the analysis portion:

1.) Meh.
2.) Again, meh.
3.) I don't really care either way.
4.) Maybe, but I guess I don't really care too much about that either.
5.) Approval from whom? From you? Nope, still don't care.
6.) Nope. Am I to assume that you're stuck in a high-status job? If so, how Randian of you.
7.) I don't care much for sub-groups either, but nice try.

Actually, you're about as accurate as Miss Cleo, the former phone psychic whose pronouncements were notoriously vague enough to sound applicable to everyone even though she was pulling them from the same place you pulled yours. Maybe you could keep that schtick in mind as a sideline for when you inevitably try to go Galt.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013
Hypocrisy is top of my list of pet hates.
Reply
:iconkimsy2358:
kimsy2358 Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013
Does this suprise anyone? Ron Paul is a fuck tard.
Reply
:iconvisionoftheworld:
VISIONOFTHEWORLD Featured By Owner Feb 14, 2013
Not a bit.
Reply
:iconkimsy2358:
kimsy2358 Featured By Owner Feb 14, 2013
Exactly.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Maybe only his most dedicated followers (like the guys who bought the domain name that Ronnie wants to confiscate) but certainly not the rest of us.
Reply
:iconkimsy2358:
kimsy2358 Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013
Yup.
Reply
:iconremind-you:
Remind-You Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013
I love seeing people throw mud and shit at Ron Paul for the everyday kind of things that most people in his position would do. Blown way the fuck out of proportion and twisted by the media of course, while our dear and noble leaders continue to drive our country into the ground. More that that I love seeing you pathetic sheep eat this shit up instead of thinking about how our country is completely in debt, our economy is trashed, our job market is dead, the rest of the world hates us for being bullying any country we disagree with, and the only people who have suggestions other than continuing to destroy our country get spun out in the media as "loony" or "depressing." Here's your (bullshit) almost free health-care and some cookies. Glad that's enough for you, ya miserable prick.
Reply
:iconnovuso:
Novuso Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013
He obviously has no real rebuttal to what you said. Good job. Ron Paul forever!
Reply
:icongamelno:
gamelno Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013
~Remind-You is a troll and a chronic blocker.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 12, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Yeah, blocking is so convenient because you can make any argument- no matter how full of fail- look like a victory!
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
When you put yourself on a pedestal like Ron Paul's been doing for so long, don't be surprised at the reactions elicited when you step off.

Also, "Run-on Sentence" hits with 72 words! It wasn't very effective...
Reply
:iconremind-you:
Remind-You Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013
Thanks for providing such an insightful rebuttal. Glad I wasted the few seconds of your life to count out my mistake.
Reply
:icondefaultking:
defaultking Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
OK.
Reply
Add a Comment: