Oh, wait….strike that: Ronulans are "non-interventionists". You refuse to change the world. You just want to "restore" America. But the REV♥Lution is here! And how better to express this than by combining the image of Che Guevara with that of Ron Paul? Â… Â…
Get yours today, while they remain in stock!
Check out how the Paul follower excuses the image merge, as a good thing….kinda like using capitalism to promote a communist. I mean….c’mon: the site he uses to peddle his merchandise is even called "anarchyware". Do they really believe blending the image and creating Che Paul/ Ron Guevera is a good thing?
What does it say about a "real conservative" candidate whose "paleocon" supporters are entangling their alliances with anti-war lefties, anti-war righties, 9/11 truthers, anti-zionists, and neocon conspiracists?
Check these out if you haven’t (See? Free promotion to all you Paulbots whining about media suppression of the Ron Paulution Revolution):
Brits 4 Presidential Candidate Ron Paul
Belgians for Ron Paul
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
This T-shirt is more or less a ripoff of this older idea:
Reagan T-shirt. I gather that you think the actual image merge steps over the line somehow? Or are both T-shirts offensive?
It could just be the partisan in me, but the Reagan one doesn’t seem as comically weird to me. I think it better expresses the sentiments of what that guy (is Jason or Justin his name? I could click the link in my post, but….naw!) who designed the Ron Paul version was trying to get across. The one he designed for Che Paul looks more like a Che supporter trying to co-opt Ron Paul to support communism and anarchy. And I am absolutely not a fan of Che Guevara. Maybe it’s because he kept the beret and long hair. He should have just kept Ron Paul’s likeness rather than overdo the Che conjuring.
I personally found them both kind of offensive, but I grant that the second one is creepier.
Tough crowd around here.
Though there are a lot of takes/variation on anarchy, it would be next to impossible to equate it to communism, which requires a government by default.
The brand of anarchy to which I subscribe is a capitalist one. It’s a mouthful, but anarcho-capitalism is the closest term you could use. And no, it’s not leftist. And hell no its not conservative. It’s libertarianism taken to its natural conclusion.
Anyway, as far as my Che-esque Ron Paul image, some folks just don’t get it. I wonder if they’re the same ones who believe the Bible should be take literally. Art and marketing often hijack the logos and images of their opposition and then use them for their own benefit. It’s this basic principle that led to the “Capitalism made this shirt possible” or the Reagen shirts cited above. To make any differentiation between them, claiming one as less offensive or better than the others, is nothing more than a bunch of mental masturbatory hogwash.
You either accept the principle — to turn the symbols of your enemy against your enemy — or you don’t. Pick one.