• Thu, Dec 29 2011

Crushable Quoteable: Kelly Clarkson Endorses Ron Paul, Pisses Everyone Off

Kelly Clarkson has outed herself as a Republican and a supporter of Ron Paul. The pop star took to her Twitter and Whosay account yesterday to endorse the politician:

“I love Ron Paul. I liked him a lot during the last republican nomination and no one gave him a chance. If he wins the nomination for the Republican party in 2012 he’s got my vote. Too bad he probably won’t.”

Unfortunately for Kelly, a lot of her followers appear to be better informed that she about the politics of Ron Paul. They swiftly replied to Kelly to inform her of the politician’s racist and homophobic past, and Kelly was forced to defend herself:

“I am really sorry if I have offended anyone. Obviously that was not my intent. I do not support racism. I support gay rights, straight rights, women’s rights, men’s rights, white/black/purple/orange rights. I like Ron Paul because he believes in less government and letting the people (all of us) make the decisions and mold our country. That is all. Out of all of the Republican nominees, he’s my favorite.”

Orange rights! Just for Snooki. Later on, Kelly made another statement:

“Man my eyes have been opened to so much hate tonight. If y’all ever disagree with something I say please don’t feel the need to attack me. I will listen to what you say and any articles or viewpoints you have when you say it with respect. Being hateful is not a healthy way to get people to see or hear you. I was raised to respect people and their decisions and beliefs and I hope you will grant me the same decency. If you don’t agree with me simply unfollow me. It’s really that easy. I hope you don’t because I would love the chance to hear what you have to say but if you’re so blinded by hate you can’t seek peace and progress then that is your unfortunate prerogative.”

What an infuriating argument, right? If you’re using Twitter to make political statements, then you’re opening up the lines of discourse, and that’s going to play out on Twitter. Which means brief statements of opposition. “If you don’t agree with me simply unfollow me” is a pretty clear way of making the point that you don’t deserve a platform for making political statements.

(via Huffington Post)

What We're Reading:
Share This Post:
  • Jamie Peck

    This probably makes me sadder than it should.

  • jamie

    i think she’s just asking people to frame their disagreements in kinder words. she hopes people don’t unfollow her so she can hear their opinions, but she wants the opinions voiced in a respectful manner. i agree with that sentiment – a good political debate is essential, but it can so quickly turn to vitriol and name calling (eg, “you’re so stupid for not agreeing with me; you’re so stupid for liking that candidate” etc) that i’ve seen in the comment section of this site and others. people get so heated about broadcasting their opinions that they don’t stop, listen and respond with respect.

    of course, as a very public person on twitter she has opened herself up to criticism and in an imperfect world, some people will be rude. but i don’t think there is anything wrong with asking people not to be rude – let’s share our opinions, but do so in a way that doesn’t insult each other.

  • Nancy

    That was the most mature response to hate caused by simple disagreement that I’ve heard in a loooong time. All year I’ve noticed more and more people crazily attacking anyone they disagree with and focing them to apologize or attack back. Kelly’s answer was as close to perfect as I’ve seen, and I’m soooo disappointed that you’d pick out the one phrase that, on it’s own, sounds immature and say that she doesn’t DESERVE a platform for making politcal statements. Doesn’t everyone?
    I have a feeling you were influenced by her support for Ron Paul, and in this case I think you, Liana, are the one who has responded immaturely, not Kelly.

  • Michael Suede

    Ron Paul delivered poor black babies for free when no other doctors would: http://youtu.be/8Rv0Z5SNrF4

  • Mike D

    Iowa GOP explains moving vote tabulation away from HQ
    1774 precints-how does one have campaign representatives for each precint accomapny the votes to where tabulation happens? 6 candidatesx1774 precients=10,000+ individuals in the night moving the votes to a ‘location’? Won’t happen..3 people cannot keep a secret(location). So the ballots will be in the posession of the few. Will they be ‘stuffed’? Precounted and first? Locked in a box during transport? 1774 locks? 1774 boxes? Won’t happen. Will the transporters be searched first, will they be trailed, will they bemonitored in the transport vehicles, will the vehicles be search before transport and after?
    The Party is simply moving off-site-NOT SIMPLE.
    said it was only to avoid a sabotage.- When simplicty is gone..duplicity steps in.

    Those slips are collected, taken to a table, and counted in the open.- To bad people are emotional about their candidate, too bad the democratic process is some times messy, arguementative. Too bad it is inconveinent to have to deal with the basic premiss of one person one vote.

    The answer is not to avail simplicity where there can be no simple solution, the answer is to avail an open vote. Deal with it GOP. Like it has always been dealt with, infront of everybody, no secret location, no unknown transfers