The threads there are no longer 95-5 against RP like they were in 2007. Now they're running about 75-25, with a lot of RP supporters fighting the good fight there. The owner/moderator is extremely hostile to anything but the neocon party line, in case you didn't know, so 25% support must irritate him no end.
The intellectual level of the two sides of the debate is also striking. One side is full of obvious misstatements of fact, childish name-calling, and false choices presented as reality. For an example of each: on one thread I just read there, a poster claimed that Ron Paul supported the Kelo decision, and his proof was his linking to a LewRockwell.com article where Ron Paul unambiguously rails against the Kelo decision; numerous invocations of Ron Paul supporters as kooks who live in their parents' basements; and repeated references to Ron Paul's "cut-and-run" strategy, since cut-and-run and kill-em-all are obviously the only two choices in foreign policy.
The other side is full of reasoned argumentation, facts, and logic. No wonder we're winning.
The intellectual level of the two sides of the debate is also striking. One side is full of obvious misstatements of fact, childish name-calling, and false choices presented as reality. For an example of each: on one thread I just read there, a poster claimed that Ron Paul supported the Kelo decision, and his proof was his linking to a LewRockwell.com article where Ron Paul unambiguously rails against the Kelo decision; numerous invocations of Ron Paul supporters as kooks who live in their parents' basements; and repeated references to Ron Paul's "cut-and-run" strategy, since cut-and-run and kill-em-all are obviously the only two choices in foreign policy.
The other side is full of reasoned argumentation, facts, and logic. No wonder we're winning.