I certainly don't mean to discourage people from getting involved. Even if I don't support who you support, I believe it is wonderful that people are willing to engage in a grassroots campaign to support what they believe in.

At the same time, one must be realistic. One has to understand that there are consequences to one's actions - or lack thereof. One also has to understand that the music in the air is not Pomp and Circumstance or Hail to the Chief, rather, it is a gravitationally-challenged female singing her heart out.

Ron Paul never stood a chance of winning the nomination. I've been saying that since people began to tell me about Paul and I began to research who he was. I discovered that Paul is a decent man, he is a man of his word, he voted his conscience instead of what he the lobbyists told him (sometimes he was the lone vote of reason). I liked Paul, initially. Then I heard Paul speak, or, rather, shriek at the first debate I watched. He kept asking, in a shrill voice, "Where does it say that in the Constitution? Where does it say that in the Constitution?"

I knew at that point he was unelectable. Not that the Constitution is a bad thing, it isn't. It is the founding document of this nation and We The People should be supporting those who support the Constitution. I applaud Paul's staunch stance. However, he also came across to the people as a crackpot, making him unelectable. He is the wrong man sending the right message.

Some of Paul's supporters were vicious. If I suggested that I could not support Paul, a common response from a Paul supporter was that I was somehow against the Constitution. Supporters would point out that I was like a sheep and that I didn't have enough brains to support their guy.

I don't know about you, but I am not easily swayed to support who you support when you insult me. But, perhaps you were bullied into supporting who you support, and you simply believed that by repeatedly punching me in the face (verbally), I'd give up and say, "Gosh, I support Ron Paul!"

This morning, the morning following Super Tuesday, I scour the 'Net to see who won what primaries and caucuses. I am particularly interested to see how many caucuses and primaries Paul won. After all, I was told by Paul's supporters that there was a vast right-wing conspiracy (remind you of anyone running for president?) to keep Paul out of the debates (I must have a magic TV because I saw Paul in every debate I watched) and to suppress his poll numbers. After all, I was shown link after link after link of underground (yet unscientific) polls that showed Paul had a commanding lead. I was told that all of the money Paul was bringing in only proved how much support he had.

Yet, I fail to see a single state that Paul won.

Two things concern me greatly about Paul's rabid supporters (I am not suggesting that all of his supporters are rabid, there are decent people who support Paul because of his message and can look beyond the messenger) - the fact that these supporters are living in a fantasy world and the fact that these supporters are now suggesting they will write-in Paul or, just as bad, stay home on Election Day.

I suggest that Paul's rabid fans live in a fantasy world because even this morning, they are saying that the fight is not over and that the nomination process has not ended. Part of what they say is very true - the race is not over. Mitt Romney still has a chance. Not a great chance, but a chance. But, to suggest that Paul stands a chance, any chance, of winning the nomination is completely unrealistic. There is now a 0.0% chance that Ron Paul will be the nominee. He has failed to win a single state up to this point. Even if Paul won every single state between today and the last state to vote, Paul will never earn enough delegates to win.

What frightens me about some of the rabid supporters of Paul are those who are actually gleeful that John McCain will likely win. It isn't that they like McCain - in fact, many detest the man. Rather, they are overjoyed because they believe the GOP will lose the election and that a Clinton presidency will be a wake-up call for conservatives.

These rabid supporters again show they don't live in the real world. While a Clinton presidency may indeed serve as a wake-up call for conservatives, we have to live in a country run by Clinton for at least four years (if not eight) while the Democrats control Congress. These rabid supporters appear to live from election to election and forget about the time in between elections.

Still other Paul supporters keep asking, "Can things get any worse than Bush?" The simple answer is, "Yes, of course."