He was also easily the biggest hypocrite running, which is saying quite a lot.

Honestly, I’ve never seen this as a problem in America. I’ve watched friends, family and co-workers date, marry, re-marry, etc. and race has never come up as an issue.

Yeah, that’s right. These European guys are probably racist behind closed doors and want to fuck a black woman. Just because.

Ooooh, I’m racist for having preferences now! Thanks Tumblr SJWs!

No, we’re not, and certainly not inasmuch as the “broad truth” you are describing is “dating habits”. You cannot, for example, extrapolate the dating habits of Iowan senior citizens with Oakland teenagers, though they both fall in that overbroad category. To glean any insight into the specific topic of dating, the…

Your attempt to portray American men as simpleton-racists falls flat on a number of fronts. First off, there are major cultural differences between LA and New York City alone from a RACIAL standpoint, especially when you throw in regional cities like Atlanta vs Boston vs New Orleans. In otherwords, the United States…

Interesting article. Is this lack of interest that you are talking about spread across all flavours of American men, regardless of ethnic background, skin colour, etc?

Wouldn’t this require previous Paul supporters admitting to themselves that they’re idiots?

I’m not sure the connection is as direct/literal as you’re understanding it to be. It’s not that anybody is watching South Park and literally ripping ideas for how to appeal to people from specific episodes. It’s that the political mentality of the Pauls, and now of Trump (though packaged in a more “honest” fashion,…

Neither of the Pauls was a libertarian when it came to social issues. Both were anti-choice, anti-gay, and anti-immigrant. About all they were libertarian on when it came to social issues was legalizing pot.

There are a couple of different ways they can go off the rails:

Or ... Burnenko just doesn’t like Rand Paul.

South Park can be fine in doses, but as a former fan (like most people back in my high school days, when the show first started airing, I thought it was this amazing, transgressive thing), I got really, really turned off at how so much of the point came to be to emptily poke at any sort of genuine, real-world social…

No, I think he very clearly calls the Pauls’ intentions and motivations into question, though yes, of course Burnenko is also questioning the good sense of those they targeted among the voting public:

The survival of the GOP depends on them abandoning their core consituency (social conservatives)? Trump is an indication that the GOP as we know it is already dying, and a GOP made to target a fiscally conservative but socially liberal electorate would be an entirely new party.

But neither Paul had libertarianesque appraoches to social issues. They are both anti-choice assholes. Plus, there’s no such thing as a Libertarian. They’re like Jack-a-lopes.

He [Donald Trump] gets South Park—its cheap spite, its self-congratulation, the fantasy that privileged scorn for political correctness is subversive, rather than the exact opposite—better than the Pauls ever did...

It’s been proven time and time again that states, especially southern ones, can’t be remotely fucking trusted with power.

Ironically, the best way to link such disparate entities with no apparent natural or obvious connection would be... an episode of South Park.

God, thank you for drawing this link between the Pauls, “libertarianism,” and what I’ve always thought I was the only person to refer to as “South Park politics.”