The Friday Political Thread: Gay Pedophiles and Tears Edition

David Weigel | January 11, 2008

Hey, did anything happen this week? Ah, yes:

- Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary because of (pick any two): Barack Obama calling her "likeable enough" in the final debate, shock jocks heckling her about laundry, Clinton herself crying in a diner, or the marrow-deep racism of New Hampshire Democrats.

- John McCain won the New Hampshire primary because he got to run against Mitt Romney.

- McCain's victory gave him an uptick in national and state primary polls. Clinton got no such boost, and Obama won the endorsements of mighty Nevada unions, John Kerry, and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano.

- The New Republic reported on many years of Ron Paul's newsletters, containing more racist, homophobic and conspiratorial passages than had ever been publicized up to now.

Quote of the week:

"Within many of our own lifetimes, a man who looked like Barack Obama had a difficult time even using the public restrooms in our state. What is happening may well say a lot about America, and I do think as an early primary state we should earnestly shoulder our responsibility in determining how this part of history is ultimately written." - South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R)

Below the fold...

- As John McCain gets set to win the Michigan primary, Henry Payne pokes around in his environmental record.

- Lawrence O'Donnell compares John Edwards to Bull Conner, or something.

- Max Blumenthal takes a close look at Mike Huckabee's holy pals.

- Phil Klein discovers that it takes a woman to run a nanny state.

- Steve Sailer criticizes Christopher Hitchens criticizing Barack Obama.

This week's Politics 'n' Prog, in keeping with the themes of crying and severe depression, comes to us from Marillion. (If you're not crying halfway in, check out the outfit sported by mini-Fish.)

Comments

I|1.11.08 @ 6:41PM|#

What is this stuff I hear about Ron Paul having some association with racists or racism?

Is there a link?

Edward|1.11.08 @ 6:42PM|#

Now that Ron Paul has been exposed for the disgusting wacko he is, my work here is done. Good luck to intelligent libertarians on purging the wackos from your ranks.

|1.11.08 @ 6:46PM|#

Quoth the mighty EDWARDO:

my work here is done.

Such a tease!

Episiarch|1.11.08 @ 6:55PM|#

NEWSLETTER RACISTS RON PAUL BARGLE RABBLE BLARF

Ben|1.11.08 @ 7:01PM|#

That was Edward's final post! And he's never coming back! And he's going to sue the Urkobold! Ron Paul and his supporters suck!

|1.11.08 @ 7:11PM|#

Epsiarch,

Were you complaining when they did like 20 blog posts about the money bombs?

|1.11.08 @ 7:24PM|#

So I'm thinking of creating the H'n'R filesystem. The way it would work is it would take your data, chop it up, and hide it in various old Ron Paul posts here. Free storage!

|1.11.08 @ 7:24PM|#

"Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary because of (pick any two): Barack Obama calling her "likeable enough" in the final debate, shock jocks heckling her about laundry, Clinton herself crying in a diner, or the marrow-deep racism of New Hampshire Democrats."

Her positions may have just appealed more to New Hampshire Democrats, or they may have found her the stronger candidate for the general election. I always think these kind of "analyses" are a bit goofy.

"the endorsements of mighty Nevada unions"

To anyone who is anti-union "mighty union" means "having some influence"

|1.11.08 @ 7:27PM|#

Hypocritical Bigots Charge
Ron Paul with Bigotry!?!?
January 11, 2008

By Pete Mackin - The guilt by association crew is in full force this election season. However, the timing and viciousness of the attacks against Dr. Ron Paul are hypocritical beyond comprehension - bigots charging the least bigoted candidate of bigotry.

The guilt by association charge which is often leveled at Congressman Paul is, in its very foundation, a collectivist view. And collectivism is by definition racist. That's where you get the common quotes, "you people" and other group labels. Daily reporters talk about "9/11 Truthers" supporting Dr. Paul. Or "white supremacists give Ron Paul money" and so on and so on. In truth, they are using the "you people" charge against Dr. Paul.

It's not a surprise; they've also used guilt by association against Sen. Barack Obama and former Gov. Mitt Romney. In particular, they hang racist charges against their churches around their necks. I will not repeat those charges here, so as not to perpetuate bigotry.

It's important to remember however, that the guilt by association charge was leveled at Jesus Christ by the political and religious leaders of his day in the trial that led to his crucifixion. The irony is that the whole point of Christianity is that our sin is associated with Christ's sacrifice and therefore, our association with him through faith serves as our atonement for sin. He died for our sins, not his.

In this case, Dr. Paul is suffering charges of racism and lunacy for the "sins" of his followers. Any serious journalist, who takes time to pore through Rep. Paul's voluminous congressional records - his library of books and speeches - or his vast collection of videos, will find nothing remotely similar to the words of these newsletters.

It's also important to consider the source of this story and the person and publication being held up by the likes of CNN, MSNBC, National "Public" Radio and others. James Kurchick and The New Republic are the source of this "new" revelation that happened to break on the eve of the New Hampshire Primary - where Dr. Paul was expected to see his best turnout.

Let's first look into The New Republic's past. There's Stephen Glass' fabrication of a story called "Hack Heaven" in 1998. In 1995 Ruth Shalit was fired for repeated charges of plagiarism and factual errors. Lee Stiegal, who still writes for the publication called internet detractors of his "blogofacists" for revealing that he was ghostwriting support for himself, a charge he first denied and then turned out to be a liar. Good writer credentials there.

And of course you have The New Republic's "Shock Troops" story from last July which spawned an investigation by the U.S. Army turning up factual errors and the fact that the anonymous soldier in the story was married to a magazine staffer. Now on to the "journalist" in question.

I'm guessing there will be some pending litigation in James Kirchick's future, in that he slandered historian and author Thomas DiLorenzo who responded, "Only an ignorant conspiracy theorist like Jamie Kirchick would assume that anyone who studies secession in a scholarly way is necessarily some kind of KKK-sympathizing kook. He knows that Ron Paul will not sue him for defamation because he is a public figure. I, however, am not a public figure."

Berin M. a blogger from the Gays and Lesbians for Paul website, notes that Kirchick is a gay activist who supports Rudy Giuliani and from conversations with him, feels slighted that the Log Cabin Republicans didn't endorse Rudy. Berin writes, "As gays and lesbians, we should be able to see through the smear tactics of people like Kirchick to appreciate the true friends of freedom.

"Yes, Ron Paul should have exercised much closer scrutiny of things written in his name. One might fairly question his managerial skills--but he is no bigot. Paul articulates a consistent and coherent philosophy of politics that is deeply rooted in the liberal tradition," he adds. "Those gays and lesbians who reject Paul's Constitutionalism in favor of candidates who might promise greater personal autonomy do themselves a great disservice. Institutions, constitutions and decentralization matter profoundly to sustainability of personal autonomy, as the doomed liberals of 1920s Weimer Germany would learn at the expense of Germany's gays, Jews and other minorities."

Then there are the actual comments by presidential candidates. Sen. Hillary Clinton on Jan. 15, 2006 said that the Republican leaders have run the U.S. House of Representatives "like a plantation." Or the speech where she introduced a quote saying, "It's from Mahatma Gandhi. He ran a gas station down in St. Louis for a couple of years. A lot of wisdom comes out of that gas station."

Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani dressed in African attire and mocked an African lion for being lazy. He then tried to convince a zoo worker to let the lion free (not funny considering recent news reports) to find a job. I guess all Africans like to laze around collecting welfare.

Mitt Romney used the term "tar baby", yikes! How about John McCain's wonderful quote, "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." As far as I can tell, former Gov. Mike Huckabee is most racist against white people.

He likes calling people racist for requiring illegal immigrants to prove citizenship before they could get a driver's license and saying those who opposed his giving financial aid for college to illegal immigrants racist. And at a League of United Latin America Association, he told the crowd, "Pretty soon, southern white guys like me may be in the minority."

Of course if you're the Secretary of State or former Secretary of State or a distinguished senator from New York, you're not qualified to be president according to Fred Thompson, because you're be a woman. "This year, it's a man, and next year, it's going to be a man,'' said the actor and former US senator from Tennessee. "I can see no one else who's qualified to be president of the United States.''

Now, show me the direct quote for Rep. Ron Paul that proves he's a racist - a video; an audio clip; anything from his congressional record or one of his books. I've never seen one. In fact, I've seen the exact opposite.

"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individual who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups...The true antidote to racism is liberty...Rather than looking to government to correct what is essentially a sin of the heart, we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism." - Ron Paul, Dec. 24, 2002

|1.11.08 @ 7:28PM|#

- Henry Payne pokes around in his environmental record.

This comment is a twofer.

As John McCain gets set to win the Michigan primary,

Don't bet on it. Romney's dad is fondly remebered here. This indicates too close to call.

Henry Payne pokes around in his environmental record.

It's an issue here, no doubt. On the front page of the states biggest newspaper, the Detroit Free Press was this article.

I'm voting Ron Paul, but I'd bet on Romney.

Diebold|1.11.08 @ 7:29PM|#

Polls don't lie MNG

She stole it with compromised electronic voting machines.There should be an investigation into the disenfranchisement of the Black New Hampshirean as well.

...|1.11.08 @ 7:30PM|#

TLDR

|1.11.08 @ 7:36PM|#

"There should be an investigation into the disenfranchisement of the Black New Hampshirean as well."
All twelve of them?

|1.11.08 @ 7:39PM|#

Get a load of this: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59639

"Add thermostats to the list of private property the government would like to regulate as the state of California looks to require that residents install remotely monitored temperature controls in their homes next year."

Man alive. And people on here are still throwing a fit over a handful of 15-year-old articles Ron Paul didn't write for newsletters he didn't edit. If this doesn't put that into perspective, what does? If you're withdrawing your support over what is really a relatively minor incident in a man's otherwise tremendous career, than start complaining when stuff like the above becomes the norm.

|1.11.08 @ 7:40PM|#

*then don't start complaining

|1.11.08 @ 7:43PM|#

J sub D
Thanks for the link. I always get my polls from here:
http://www.slate.com/id/2175496/
Where they had Huck up this morning.

I hope Huck or McCain wins. As you probably know I hate Romney, and while I want a Dem to win and think he will be way easier to beat than McCain, I just cannot get over my irrational (?) visceral dislike for such an unprincipled human (?) being...

Of course Huck is nearly completely insane, but there is no way he wins the nomination. Once it looks like it is going to be him the GOP machine will swoop down and eat him (it already is doing it, can you think of one major GOP magazine or website that isn't piling on Huck right now?). So imo Huck's main attraction is he ends Romney's run. Then its between Rudy and McCain, both of whom I can live with (though I want to give a shout out to fluffy, I read an article in the next-to-recent New Yorker on Rudy's mayoral rule, and that guy indeed is the authoritarian paranoid nepotistic d*ckweed you've always said he was)...

Grand Chalupa|1.11.08 @ 7:45PM|#

Speaking of that piece of shit Hitchens, who I never get tired of attacking due to him being the only apologist for mass murder accepted into the Beltway covo, here's an old article I found from the American Conservative appropriately titled "The Purest Neocon"

Hitchens has never apologized for his Trotskyism. As he told British writer Johann Hari in October 2004, "I don't regret anything. ... [The socialist movement's] achievements were real, and I'm glad I was a part of it." And in the July/August 2004 issue of The Atlantic, Hitchens wrote a hagiographic essay about a figure whom he claimed "always was … a prophetic moralist." Hitchens was not writing about Mother Teresa or John Paul II, but about Leon Trotsky-a man who was an active participant in and apologist for Lenin's Red Terror, the inventor of the "blocking units" that would gun down Russian troops foolish enough to defy the commissars by retreating, and the author of such witty aphorisms as "We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."

Hitchens also took Amis to task for Koba the Dread in The Atlantic, criticizing him for suggesting the dreaded moral equivalence between the Nazis and the Communists and for wondering if the right side won the Russian Civil War. Hitchens's dogged determination to defend Lenin shows that he is, at heart, as intense a believer as any radical Islamist. After all, it was one thing to believe in 1917 that the Bolsheviks might be better than the Romanovs; it is quite another to believe that still today, tens of millions of corpses later.

Amis had also made the mistake, in a letter to Hitchens, of urging his friend to turn his back on Trotsky because Hitchens's "prophetic moralist" was really a "nun-killer." Amis should have realized that an appeal based on sympathy for nuns was hardly the way to his friend's heart, and Hitchens responded by mocking Amis for having a "special horror of Bolshevik anti-clericalism." What Amis has a "special horror of" is eloquently described in his book: a regime that killed 2,691 priests, 1,962 monks, and 3,447 nuns of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1922 alone. None of this bloodshed bothers Hitchens, who has recently written that "Secularism ... only became thinkable after several wars and revolutions had ruthlessly smashed the hold of the clergy on the state." Since the American Revolution did not produce a single executed clergyman, Hitchens is here singing the praises of the Jacobins and the Bolsheviks.

http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_10/article3.html

Reason of course gladly invited him to their Christmas party. Ron Paul (if he actually partied) probably won't be invited next year. At least no one can accuse Hitchens of racism.

|1.11.08 @ 7:47PM|#

I predict Hillary gets whomped in SC btw, by 5-10 points...Now that Obama seems viable I see him getting the bulk of the AA vote there. The endorsements are going to keep rolling in for Obama: endorsing him makes you look tolerant and helps secure and mollify the AA vote for you. It's really a no lose situation for most Democratic politicians...With Hillary's strong negatives its risky to endorse her.

I caught Obama on Tyra Banks today and he was very sharp. I like the guy, I just think the GOP attack machine will grind that guy up like hamburger...

|1.11.08 @ 7:48PM|#

Get a load of this:

My favorite part of the link -
Claudia Chandler, assistant executive director for the California Energy Commission, told WND the new systems would be highly beneficial to residents.

It made me want to punch her. Repeatedly.

|1.11.08 @ 7:50PM|#

I also would consider it DELICIOUS if Romney, with his whorish religion baiting and trumpeting, were to get beat by the very folks he so basedly courts. Ah, poetic irony...

|1.11.08 @ 7:56PM|#

While I'm making picks, I would not be surprised at all for the Seahawks to upset GB and the Chargers to upset the Colts.
I don't see Dallas or the Pats losing though.

|1.11.08 @ 8:01PM|#

Just to show y'all how slow I can be. I was momentarily thrown by the term AA vote. Alcoholics Anonymous? I figgered it out, but darn I can be dense sometimes.

What surprises me is this from my second link.

The Free Press sent questions to eight top candidates asking their views on tackling invasive species, fixing global warming, diverting Great Lakes water to parched states and supporting $20 billion in funding to restore the lakes, from rebuilding sewers to repairing wetlands.

Only Republican Mitt Romney, a Michigan native, responded.

The largest circulation in the state. On the front page. I think it matters. Even GOPers in Michigan are concered about the environment.

|1.11.08 @ 8:15PM|#

Once it looks like it is going to be him the GOP machine will swoop down and eat him ...

MNG, He get's the ax this weekend. Crysty says so.

[retching while typing] From The Nation's article about Huckabee.

As Cole told me, "To date there's well over 139 prophecies that have come to pass exactly as the Lord says. Mike believes those things. Anyone with any Bible knowledge would have to say that this looks like the time. We're so close to the Lord's return."

Read that link, folks. Then tell this atheist what is so darn good about Christians.
That people will vote for this ignorant, hillbilly, whack job preacher is beyond me.

Bingo|1.11.08 @ 8:25PM|#

That people will vote for this ignorant, hillbilly, whack job preacher is beyond me.

- Jesus
- For the children
- USA USA USA

It's the winning combination for the GOP primary, J sub D!

Mike Laursen|1.11.08 @ 8:26PM|#

Well, we know it wasn't Sanford ghost writing those articles for the Ron Paul newsletter. Was that a really, really veiled racist comment or a really, really veiled racially-tolerant comment?

|1.11.08 @ 8:29PM|#

I heard there is going to be a recount in NH? Isn't that worthy of a mention?

Plant Immigration Rights Supor|1.11.08 @ 8:30PM|#

"Read that link, folks. Then tell this atheist what is so darn good about Christians.
That people will vote for this ignorant, hillbilly, whack job preacher is beyond me."

I am an ignostic and I have to say that there are Christians and there are Christians. I wouldn't mind having a bunch of Quakers as a neighbors or living in an Amish Community because those types of Christians are not generally going to shove THE GOD'S WORD down your gullet. The Huckabee type Christian on the other hand . . . That is a whole other story.

|1.11.08 @ 8:30PM|#

Claudia Chandler, assistant executive director for the California Energy Commission, told WND the new systems would be highly beneficial to residents.

I'm sure that'll be their POV when they put the non-removable chips in their arms, too.

I'd say I'm glad I escaped from California, but arguably Hawaii is right behind CA in the nanny-statism race to the bottom.

SIV|1.11.08 @ 8:31PM|#

asking their views on tackling invasive species


Nativists

Plant Immigration Rights Suppo|1.11.08 @ 8:33PM|#

SIV, you are right. They are definately nativists :-)

jp|1.11.08 @ 8:38PM|#

Well, we know it wasn't Sanford ghost writing those articles for the Ron Paul newsletter. Was that a really, really veiled racist comment or a really, really veiled racially-tolerant comment?

I was wondering the same thing. Just what the heck was he trying to say (or not say)?

|1.11.08 @ 8:51PM|#

Remind me to pass along the joke about how Opporknockity only tunes once.
I say that to say RP is out of resonance with the hoi polloi.
Political contests will never be about ideas. They will always be about being in tune and resonance.
To make matters worse, who the hell would want to be in resonance with the hoi polloi? p u
I'm not here trying to peel away a few voters to convert them to non-voting peaceful anarchists such as moi. Anarchists have nothing to offer.
But what if nothing is all there is? Except for peace and love, which could be all there is. Which is something, come to think.
...Ruthless

The Wine Commonsewer|1.11.08 @ 9:21PM|#

my work here is done.

Yeah, we've heard that before.

Political contests will never be about ideas

Had lunch today with a guy who plans to vote for Obama. Why: He's young, charming, and my guy wants to see a couple of rug rats running around the White House ("like Kennedy").

Guy thought RP was off his rocker to propose abolishing the income tax even though my guy hates taxes almost as much as he hates Mexicans (wants that wall built, and right now) and not quite as much as he dislikes blacks.

How that squares with a vote for Obama?

[shrugs]

The Wine Commonsewer|1.11.08 @ 9:24PM|#

Yer dating yourself with that Opporknockitty stuff.

I'm pouring some wine and gonna watch Deja Vu with the family.

Glass is half empty or better, so it behooves to enjoy life a bit before they send the black helicopters and barricade your street.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.11.08 @ 9:26PM|#

Prole, you keep talking about Hawaii, God Love You! Damn if I don't need a couple of acres of coffee looking across the Pacific somewhere south of Captain Cook on the Big Island.

My take on Hawaii, is that they're bad news but they're so disorganized and laid back that it doesn't matter.

Where do you call home? Brah.

Ali|1.11.08 @ 9:33PM|#

Oh... there is a lot to catch up on. It has been a crazy week and those RP threads were formidable in length that I did not know what to say.

While I personally feel somewhat "betrayed" by Ron Paul (it was sad to see a potentially dark side of the man who I thought had almost a perfect integrity, regardless of specific political views), I am still a fan of Paul. Have you seen how he did yesterday in the debate? Wow!

The Wine Commonsewer|1.11.08 @ 9:42PM|#

Oh, that would be Deja Vu, starring Denzel Washington, thus proving I ain't no racist.

|1.11.08 @ 9:55PM|#

Now if Al Gore were running for president, people who think global warming was the most pressing political issue on the table, would still vote for him, regardless to what extent his personal uses of energy were contributing to warming. They'd vote for him because they believe his *policies* would lead to less warming.

There's good evidence that Bill Clinton was guilty of sex harassment at the very least, but feminists still supported him in droves because they believed his polices would advance their power.

Despite the fact I am personally disappointed with Ron Paul I am still voting for him because I think his political positions not only support full equality of opportunity before the law and will lead to bettering conditions for all races (especially minorities) but also because he's one of the few candidates who hasn't been mealy mouthed about his opposition to the war; more importantly he's a strict non-interventionist and he's the only candidate who would end the drug war as well as the income tax. I can't see how the other candidates can even compare.

Not to excuse these newsletters (Paul ought to come clean) but as Pete Mackin quotes above, numerous political figures have been caught making racist comments *themselves* - worse sins than Paul surely. Then there's Sharpton's anti-semitism as well as Jackson's (anyone remember "heimy town"?).

I have no idea to what extent Paul might actually hold at least latent racist views himself. But then again, just about everyone I know, including most liberals, have revealed racist or ethnocentric, or homophobic feelings from time to time. My guess is that most people are nominally somewhat racist even if they support full equality in political terms. At the very least, just about everyone has a tendency, on some occasions, to overgeneralize about some group or other based on a very small sample size of experience with members of one group. That might not be about race or homophobia - might even be about hair color of women, political preference, white men with Asian girlfriends, black men with white girlfriends, older men dating younger women, older women dating younger men, computer programmers, environmentalists.

In short, despite personal disappointment with Paul, it's just asinine and naive to change one's vote over something like this; it's the policies that candidates support that matter.

|1.11.08 @ 9:56PM|#

TWC -- My home is on the Windward side of Oahu, in Kailua.

The Democrats in the legislature, having virtually no Republicans to oppose them, have split into about five different squabbling factions -- five different degrees of statism -- but still manage to unite and pass bad stuff every year. The main trick to surviving the politics here when you're a borderline anarcho-capitalist like me is to be in a constant mild state of denial --concentrate on the cooling breezes and fluffy clouds, and pretend that The Big Square building downtown shaped like a volcano is really a power plant, or a kitten sanctuary, and isn't *really* full of sociopaths who want to take your freedom away bit by bit.

My daughter was prepping for a test on the Bill of Rights, and so I disabused her of the statist claptrap her teacher was stuffing in her head and read through it sentence by sentence, explaining which parts were being violated. Then I showed her our tax return, shocking her with how much money they'd stolen. Then I showed her the Nolan test, where she scored 100% on economics and social freedom. Out of curiousity, took her to the Libertarian Purity Test website (where I score in the low 100s) and she got a perfect 160.

Didn't know whether to be proud of her, or worried that I had failed to communicate the nuances of just how difficult is would be to eliminate all government in its entirety. Still, better that's her starting point than a perfect statist score of 0.

Ali|1.11.08 @ 10:00PM|#

What's up with the people in Hawaii. I am bombarded by one almost on a daily basis. What's happening in Hawaii that is repelling people? Not enough sun?

Jacob|1.11.08 @ 10:17PM|#

To be fair, I lost a lot of respect for MLK after learning that he was a gay pedophile.

Juan|1.11.08 @ 10:19PM|#

Out of curiosity, I just took the aforementioned Libertarian Purity test. Will you guys kick me out for being a statist wacko after scoring a 38?

|1.11.08 @ 10:21PM|#

Ali -- Your post appeared to come through a bit garbled. Are catapults regularly tossing hapless Hawaiians through the air into your vicinity? Isn't there some kind of law against this? Or did I misunderstand that whole "bombarded" thing?

* Checks to see if having adverse drug reaction causing hallucinations.

With concern, prolefeed ;)

|1.11.08 @ 10:24PM|#

Juan -- 38 is a solid, respectable score on the Libertarian Purity Test. Most of the people I know would score lower than that. It's the folks in the low single digits that need some intensive coaching.

Ali|1.11.08 @ 10:26PM|#

prolefeed- Sorry. Did not mean to be mean. Just forgot to put a smiley face at the end of my quote. Here, you'll see why. The first one I met was a prof from U. Hawaii in Manoa. The second is a very successful entrepreneur who I met yesterday and today in fact. And there were a few more with that caliber. And of course, now, you. So I did not mean it negatively at all. Sorry again.

Ali|1.11.08 @ 10:27PM|#

Oh, forgot it again... Here: :-) :-)

Racist! Racist! He said...|1.11.08 @ 11:09PM|#

rug rats

RogerX|1.11.08 @ 11:24PM|#

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh262/tatsuma_fark/publisher.jpg

So... why isn't anyone discussing Jean McIver, the current Texas RP Field Coordinator who was "subscription manager" for the racist/homophobic RP newsletters?

Not a single mention outside fark.com? There are some google results from the Ron Paul forums that have been purged... talk about a Conspiracy Theory. :)

some ungrateful slob|1.11.08 @ 11:31PM|#

Bye Edward.
Don't the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

anonymous request|1.11.08 @ 11:34PM|#

This is OT but I figure it is almost an open thread and it is at least related to issues libertarians are concerned with - dealing with the police. Maybe some lawyers read this too...

Here\'s the story: An acquaintance of mine (yes, that is true, it\'s not me) did something pretty stupid, she used a friend\'s (no, not mine) debit card to steal something on the order of $1000 from the bank. The bank not being so stupid questioned the friend about her \"stolen\" debit card showed her the atm pictures of the \"theif\" using it and asked if she recognized her. Well the friend being equally as stupid and probably rightfully scared at this point said it looked like it \"could be\" the girl it in fact is... so, the police are scheduled (is it normal for them to make appointments for this kind of thing?) to come by tomorrow morning to talk to her. So the question is, what should / can she say to the police? Obviously I know she has a 5th amendment right not to incriminate herself, but she\'s young, troubled (has been hospitalized for an eating disorder and an attempted suicide) so she may not be the most stable person to be making rational thoughtful choices when the police come knocking. I assume that since they didn\'t just get an arrest warrant and pick her up already the the friend\'s pseudo-identification wasn\'t enough for them... So, if she automatically demands a lawyer I imagine the police will say something like \"if you want to go that route we can make this very difficult and you\'re looking at X number of years in the slammer - or you can make it easy on yourself and talk.\" Also, I know that if you\'re charged with a crime the state will provide an attorney, but since she has not yet been charged, and has very little money (blew the grand already I guess) is there any way she can get an attorney for this \"questioning.\" What are the rules about how much they can question you before it is essentially an arrest? And since they\'re coming by on a Sat. morning, is there anyway you know of that she could get someone in time? Also, does the fact that she confessed this to me mean for my obligations should they come to talk to me? Can I refuse to answer even though I\'m not involved in the actual crime, or is that obstruction? Also, what does her confessing this to me mean as far as my obligation to answer questions should they somehow find me and come asking (maybe they look at phone or email records and see that we\'ve spoken a lot recently for example0? Do I have to talk or can I refuse? Ok, sorry for my threadjack, but if anyone has some knowledge and / or advice on this kind of thing (I\'ve never had any experience at all dealing with the police beyond a speeding ticket myself).

TLB|1.12.08 @ 12:01AM|#

1. Once again, here's an opportunity for Reason to do some real reporting. Look into, for instance, the "conspiracy" charges and determine how probable they are. If you haven't already, see my infamous discussion of the New Republic article. Turns out that one of those "conspiracy theories" has a pretty good sized grain of truth. Also turns out that the author is a complete establishment suck-up.

2. Once again, the Reason response to the TNR piece was completely anemic. They're like a lawyer who, instead of fighting the charges, not only agrees with the prosecutor but won't fight over things like venue and asks for more time for their client.

3. Perhaps one explanation for the response is laid out here in the comment from "formerbeltwaywonk".

4. As far as I'm concerned, Max Blumenthal has no credibility. I didn't bother with the current article, but I'd feel a lot better about it if Weigel would mention whether he had verified its contents.

5. This week's antidote for this week's prog is offered here. The title is also quite appropriate for some of the contributors to Reason.

|1.12.08 @ 12:25AM|#

curious about the Libertarian Purity Test - I scored a 60 and scored in the same range a couple of times earlier (Medium-core libertarian, iirc), but i find most of the anti-war hysteria here hilarious (e.g. ranting about "murdering civilians in foreign countries" and "living in a police state" etc.)

can someone enlighten me? since Ron Paul won't be elected, who might be an acceptable alternative candidate (less bad, if that pleases you)?

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 12:33AM|#

Prole, I am impressed with your daughter. Maybe it's high time I began some serious indoctrination, er ah, education here at the casa.

Time was that libertarians were against kids. That's changed and now there is a whole slew of kids being raised by libertarians. Prolly a good thing.

And on an unrelated note (ok, slightly related note), Mrs TWC is pretty well acquainted with a guy who heads up a sort-of libertarian org across the hill from you called the Grass Roots Institute. Name is Dick Rowland.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 12:39AM|#

BTW, TWC scored 147 out of 160 on the libertarian purity test (which I had never heard of until today).

Guess that means me and Prole's daughter will be on the wrong side of the barricades when the Night of the Long Knives comes.

Oh, should have said Grass Roots Institute of HAWAII.

|1.12.08 @ 12:46AM|#

anonymous request--

She's probably not looking at jail time, though it is possible. Assuming this is the first offense, she will probably need to plead guilty and pay a fine (usually a donation of 2x of what was stolen to a local charity like a firehouse). In most cases, people don't go to jail over a $1k mistake. Please don't ask me how I know this.

|1.12.08 @ 1:15AM|#

"remotely monitored temperature controls"

Looks like time to move to Nevada.

-jcr

Baby vs Cobra|1.12.08 @ 1:33AM|#

Baby vs Cobra

Round 1

highnumber|1.12.08 @ 1:37AM|#

Ruthless wins the thread, the world, everything.
I scored 154 on the purity test, btw.

|1.12.08 @ 1:56AM|#

If Reason Magazine was headquartered in Las Vegas, there'd be a hell of a lot less sucking up to politicians and their staffers.

-jcr

|1.12.08 @ 2:17AM|#

Re: the Purity Test -- there's no winning the damn thing, it's more an imperfect measure of how you fall on the left-lib versus minarchist vs. anarcho-capitalist continuum. IMO, you can however lose the thing, since virtually our entire state legislature would score in the single digits, and arguably half would receive a zero.

Basterts.

TWC -- I know Dick Rowland quite well -- fascinating guy, a bit of like Ron Paul, a crusty free market conservative bordering on right-libertarian. Got to know him because one of the many letters to the editors I've got published in the local papers advocating free market principles caught his eye, so he contacted me and got me on the mailing list to the free Hillsdale College newsletter, Imprimis (recommend everyone here check it out, a thoughtful monthly speech extract by noted figures on items of libertarian interest). Recently Dick twice offered me jobs with his Grass Roots Institute. I thought it over, then turned both offers down -- not enough pay, and not quite what I wanted to spend my time on compared to raising my kids and holding down the fort while my wife earns the big bucks.

Which is perhaps a rationalization for being a lazy sumbitch who won't take a job even when it falls right into his lap. Dunno.

|1.12.08 @ 2:34AM|#

Time was that libertarians were against kids. That's changed and now there is a whole slew of kids being raised by libertarians. Prolly a good thing.

That's part of why I think it's self-defeating to claim REAL libertarians have to be pro-choice. It's a lot easier to raise your own kids to have a libertarian outlook if you have a chance to point out the claptrap they're being fed in school, than if you try to change the minds of adult acquaintences who've bought into the statist party line.

If the upcoming generation of libertarians are mostly aborted, much harder to grow a movement if you have to reconvert each and every generation after their formative years.

There's a reason the Mormon church is growing so fast -- it's a staunchly pro-life movement with an insatiable emphasis on having huge families. A hundred years from now, it's quite possible that the Mormon church will be the majority of citizens in the U.S. Which is why I'm worried about trying to get it to return to its libertarian roots instead of continuing down the authoritarian conservative (but oh so very sweet and pleasant) culture it currently embraces.

I really, really like the people, but I'm more than a little concerned about a suffocatingly righteous theocracy when or if the tipping point is reached and 50% of the populace is LDS. Some of the leadership scares the whiz out of me, in a cotton candy velvety glove kind of way if you know what I mean.

Sorry for the threadjack, but nobody in the meatworld I know who I can talk to about this stuff.

|1.12.08 @ 2:38AM|#

" I'm worried about trying to get it to return to its libertarian roots "

The Mormon church? Are you serious? They started out as totalitarian theocracy.

-jcr

|1.12.08 @ 2:40AM|#

" At least no one can accuse Hitchens of racism."

You can *accuse* anyone of anything, as TNR demonstrated last week.

-jcr

|1.12.08 @ 2:51AM|#

" I'm worried about trying to get it to return to its libertarian roots "

The Mormon church? Are you serious? They started out as totalitarian theocracy.

No argument there, jcr, and they still a totalitarian theocracy, though in a much more nicey-nice, oh so very painfully pleasant and helpful way. Let me rephrase my poorly worded thoughts -- the essence of Mormon theology is on "agency", what most non-LDS would call "free agency". The official POV is that we all are here on earth to see whether we will voluntarily choose to behave in such a way so that we can return to our Heavenly Father, and that it is the work of the Devil to take away those choices, no matter how misguided our behavior. All very libertarian. But in practice, heavily LDS states like Utah have have enacted some of the most egregiously heavy-handed attempts to FORCE us to be good via laws, even though that contradicts the whole point of agency.

Thus, Mitt Romney's authoritarianism, which I submit is due to him absorbing the often sheeplike Mormon culture of blind obedience to the current Prophet/President and not being rebellious and independent-minded enough to understand the scriptures advocating letting people screw up their lives, and relying solely on persuasion to get them to change their behavior.

I was trying for brevity, but apparently sacrificed clarity in the process. My bad.

Quiet_Desperation|1.12.08 @ 3:08AM|#

"Add thermostats to the list of private property the government would like to regulate"

No worries. John & Ken are all over it, and the Mob is in motion. Government phone banks were reduced to smoking rubble this week from the call volume.

|1.12.08 @ 3:24AM|#

Prolefeed,

From what I've seen of Romney, his authoritarianism is based in ego, not theology or any other aspect of his upbringing. Just like Hillary, he considers himself so awesome that he's entitled to tell us what to do.

-jcr

|1.12.08 @ 3:48AM|#

prolefeed, thanks for mentioning the Purity Test, I'd never heard of it before. I thought I was a fairly radical libertarian, but I only scored 85. To be fair, I answered "no" for a lot of questions where the real answer is "I don't know."

|1.12.08 @ 7:04AM|#

The Libertarian Purity Test is not a libertarian purity test; it is an anarcho-capitalist purity test.

DavidS|1.12.08 @ 7:18AM|#

My daughter... Out of curiousity, took her to the Libertarian Purity Test website (where I score in the low 100s) and she got a perfect 160.

Didn't know whether to be proud of her, or worried that I had failed to communicate the nuances of just how difficult is would be to eliminate all government in its entirety.

This is supposed to be a parody, right?

|1.12.08 @ 8:10AM|#

I just want to get an early jump on the "Ron Paul was eliminated by The Establishment" meme that I can hear idling on the runway. It won't be long before the "fringe" starts to work on a revisionist history of the 2008 presidential campaign. In this "alternate history," Ron Paul was surging to win New Hampshire when the (please select one):

1) the Tri-Lateral Commission; 2) the Bilderberg Group; 3) the CIA; 4) al Qaeda; ) the Council on Foreign Relations; 5) Israel; 6) Reason Magazine; 7) a guy named "Bob"

fabricated the newsletter stories to destroy Paul's credibility. They manipulated poll data both before and after New Hampshire to supress Paul's popularity. They also infiltrated the staff of Reason magazine to make it seem as if Paul had lost support among libertarians. They eliminated Ron Paul when he became a threat to the New World Order and the American sheeple will never understand what we do, because we know and they are stupid.

And that's why I won't do two shows a night.

Ali|1.12.08 @ 8:10AM|#

prolefeed- Did you get my message?

tarran|1.12.08 @ 8:28AM|#

I got a 154. All of you, with the exception of highnumber are a bunch of statist establishmentarians! ;)

The Libertarian Purity Test is not a libertarian purity test; it is an anarcho-capitalist purity test.

That's because pure libertarianism is anarchocapitalism. When one has a libertarian position on some question of public policy, the guiding principle is the absence of initiated force or fraud in a transaction. Apply this principle to all political questions and out pops free market anarchism.

I have found that most libertarians don't object to the free-market anarchism because they feel it philosophically violates libertarian principles but because they think that an anarchy will devolve into violent chaos as competing groups fight each other for power, and that this can best be prevented by a night-watchman state. This is, in their mind, a practical compromise.

With that being said I don't think a free market anarchist will get a perfect score; two questions have non-libertarian answers as "the libertarian choice". The question about abolishing the Fed and "freezing the monetary base" and the one asking if economic regulation is "unconstitutional". Let's see, how exactly do you "freeze" a monetary base? Point guns at anyone who tries to mine more gold? It's by definition unlibertarian. Additionally, you may feel, as I do, that economic regulation is bad, but that doesn't make it unconstitutional. The constitution clearly grants Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Obviously Madison thought that meant to encourage it rather than suppress it, however just because the power is misused does not mean it's not there.

DavidS|1.12.08 @ 8:55AM|#

All of which is rather besides the point, tarran, if you believe the constitution is illegitimate and should be abolished (which you must do if you're to answer yes to all the other 'purity' questions).

Could you also explain how society can avoid devolving "into violent chaos as competing groups fight each other for power", if you believe "vigilante justice" should be a key regulating principle?

|1.12.08 @ 9:06AM|#

I ain't takin' no damned test to prove my libertarian cajones. I am what I am. (besides I might not do well). I don't need no stinkin' badges. My few friends know I support Ron Paul.

ed|1.12.08 @ 9:18AM|#

Isn't there something pathetic and embarrassing about this emphasis on shade? And why is a man with a white mother considered to be "black," anyway?

Indeed. Hitchens is typically astute here. Which makes "progressives" uneasy.
If Obama were entirely white instead of half-white, would anyone pay attention to him?
The fact that we are paying attention to him is in itself racist. "Oooh, look at the articulate black man!" If this is progress, then we still have a long way to go.

|1.12.08 @ 9:23AM|#

Prolefeed, I'm with you. Send the wife off and raise the kids yourself. Unfortunately my wife spends the family fortune trying to boost her store's sales numbers, so I have to work too. Anyway, growing up at dad's business instead of at a socialist day care will hopefully pay off for them. I must say it's making it hard for my first girl to follow the public school uniform code. I'm so proud of her!

Ali|1.12.08 @ 9:24AM|#

101!

Putter|1.12.08 @ 9:29AM|#

fabricated the newsletter stories to destroy Paul's credibility. They manipulated poll data both before and after New Hampshire to supress Paul's popularity.

Close. They long ago infiltrated the movement and created the newsletters themselves, to ensure that Ron Paul would have no chance of moving beyonf the fringes, and also to taint the message of libertarianism.

|1.12.08 @ 9:31AM|#

It seems that Reason should get out of Washington, they are being corrupted by PCness and love of power. A lot people here seem more concerned with questionable views held by someone associated with Ron rather than the pro peace and pro liberty views that Ron holds-shameful. Not sure what "perfect" libertarian you are waiting to support.

palmer|1.12.08 @ 10:02AM|#

I wish Hit & Run would avoid linking to Steve Sailer altogether.

|1.12.08 @ 10:11AM|#

But what if nothing is all there is? Except for peace and love, which could be all there is.

In you face, Peace and love!
We're #1, We're #1.

|1.12.08 @ 10:27AM|#

"A hundred years from now, it's quite possible that the Mormon church will be the majority of citizens in the U.S. Which is why I'm worried about trying to get it to return to its libertarian roots instead of continuing down the authoritarian conservative (but oh so very sweet and pleasant) culture it currently embraces."

prolfeed-I think I agree with you about the Mormon Church's stance. You know, it strikes me that the political figure that most comes to mind when I watch Mike Huckabee is Orrin Hatch (not to say Hatch speaks for all Mormons, or for that matter anyone does). Hatch had all the religious devotion, but also the calm, nice demeanor and a willingness to have government exhibit "compassionate conservatism" especially when it came to children.

I have to say I admire the "compassionate" type of conservative more than the usual garden variety. To paraphrase Patrick Moyhinhan many conservatives think life beings, and ends, at conception. These types are more interested in the control of folks than actually having a belief that conservatism can help more people live a better life. The compassionate conservative that is consistent at least has a genuine belief they are helping make society a better place.

|1.12.08 @ 10:27AM|#

I know there isn't going to be a perfect libertarian. But there's a huge leap from, say, being a pro-life libertarian to one who, at best, is so simpatico with bigots that he let them write stuff in his name without speaking out about it and, at worst, is slightly to the right of David Duke in terms of racial policy. It's been said that antisemitism is the socialism of fools, and anyone spouting that nonsense (as well as racism and homophobia) can't be a libertarian. Free as his market sense may be, his mind isn't.

|1.12.08 @ 10:28AM|#

That should read "begins, and ends, with conception"

lunchstealer|1.12.08 @ 10:32AM|#

- Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary because of (pick any two): Barack Obama calling her "likeable enough" in the final debate, shock jocks heckling her about laundry, Clinton herself crying in a diner, or the marrow-deep racism of New Hampshire Democrats.

Don't forget all those midnight sacrifices on the solstices and each equinox. All those centuries spent biding her time before finding exactly the right human body to inhabit also didn't hurt.

|1.12.08 @ 10:38AM|#

I got a 21!

That test had some nutty stuff "should the law itself be privatized." Boy, that was good for a kneeslapper!

The "yes" or "no" forced alternatives for questions like "should welfare be abolished" or "does the government spend too much" were crazy. But one of the things that I think makes libertarianism attractive to many is how it abolishes nuance and gives people a simple formula to determine their position on anything (government=good, markets=good). That's what religions are good for!

|1.12.08 @ 10:47AM|#

Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary

Am I the only one who finds it annoying that everyone is calling this a win? Both got 9 delegates so its a tie. And its the delegates that matter.

|1.12.08 @ 10:52AM|#

John McCain was racist in the SC debate, read it here:
John McCain racist in SC debate
Unfortunately it took segregationist Governor Wallace to reveal the truth that "there's not a dime's worth of difference between" Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, detaining protesters, banning books like America Deceived (book) from Amazon, stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly. They are both guilty of treason.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and save this great nation.

|1.12.08 @ 10:57AM|#

I scored a 58, leaving some poorly phrased questions blank (not everything can be answerd with a yes or no). Apparently I am "a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much."

Yeah, that's me.

Fluffy|1.12.08 @ 11:11AM|#

I got a 110, because I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, and because I don't think that a government which limited itself to protecting the rights of its citizens would be any kind of "evil", even a "necessary one". That sort of government would be a good.

After all, since the test seems to want a positive response to the vigilante justice question, viewing ALL government as evil would contradict that desired answer. If I can justly act in my own defense, I can justly delegate my defense to a third party, even the state.

greg|1.12.08 @ 11:12AM|#

So it appears that former freelance Reason contributer Dan McCarthy is now a grassroots blog contributer to Ron Paul's official campaign on his "Daily Dose" up at ronpaul2008.com

Nutter|1.12.08 @ 11:35AM|#

The compassionate conservative that is consistent at least has a genuine belief they are helping make society a better place.

That sounds like a slander on other conservatives. I'm sorry if we aren't "genuine" enough for you.

|1.12.08 @ 11:40AM|#

"The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus,detaining protesters, banning books like America Deceived (book) from Amazon, stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly."
Not quite right...
1. War in Iraq: A majority of the Democrats in the House and nearly half of them in the Senate (compared to only one GOPer in the Senate) opposed the Authorization to Use Military Force. Since then the Democrats have voted in majorities (and against GOP majorities) to enact a timetable to end the war, but it has been blocked by a filibuster by the GOP.
2. Habeas Corpus: A majority of Democrats in both the Senate and the House voted AGAINST the Military Commissions Act (which is what I imagine what you mean by habeas corpus).
3. Wiretapping: 28 Senators opposed the 2007 FISA bill. All were Democrats (a majority of the party in the Senate). A majority of the Democrats (181) in the House opposed the bill. Only 2 of the over 200 Republicans did.

I'm not sure what you are talking about with the other examples (the banned book or the detainted protestors).

The Dem party is not blameless, but they are not NEARLY as much to blame as the GOP for the above problems...

|1.12.08 @ 11:44AM|#

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act#Final_passage_in_the_Senate
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_America_Act_of_2007#Amendments

libertreee|1.12.08 @ 12:00PM|#

Fluffy--The delegation of self defense to the state is indeed the heart of the minarchist argument.

AS Rothbard points out, the problems with this are that you are delegating that power to what in reality is an almost blind monopoly power.

Now we get also into Hayek. No government has the knowledge necessary, or the incentive required, to limit itself to the simple defense of liberty.

Also we have to consider nation state theory as well, if we talk about national defense. As geographical monopolies, the nation states are always looking to expand their power geographically. The classical liberal idea of neutrality and non intervention has been just that--a seldom fulfilled ideal over the history of the US.

dodsworth|1.12.08 @ 12:05PM|#

Todd:

Paul did speak out back in 2001 (when he didn't have to) when he VOLUNTEERED to the Texas Monthly that he did not agree with the racist stuff, was sorry for it, and didn't write it. To the right of David Duke? Give me a break.

BTW, who do you think is a better candidate than Paul?

libertreee|1.12.08 @ 12:06PM|#

Lew Rockwell points out in his blog today that the newsletter flap over Ron Paul was probably NOT just a New Republic reporter initiated flap.

The writing appears to have been collaborated with someone from a 'certain Washington DC think tank".

He points out that the reporter researched this material at a library in Kansas. Kansas is the home state of the Koch brothers, who support CATO. Coincidence?

All I care about, as I said before, is that Ron Paul is the Best thing at the right time for libertarians, and the nation and world as well. Go Ron Paul!

|1.12.08 @ 12:06PM|#

Compassionate conservative? Ask the detainees at Gitmo, the raided medical marijuana clinic operators and users in California, and the tens of thousands of crippled Iraq and Afghanistan vets receiving parsimonious health care if they feel the compassion. Then duck.

Yeah, that's worked out so well we should do it all over again.

I don't want "compassion" from the knuckleheads in DC. I especially don't want it from some ignorant, hillbilly preacher who thinks Jesus' return is at hand. I just want to be left alone. To succeed or fail on my own merits, and let the chips fall where they may. Oh wait, that would require people to take responsibility for their own actions and recognize that life isn't always fair. Just like their mommy tried to teach them. Is that too much to ask?

If you want help "people live a better life", I direct you to here, here or, one of my favorites, here. Just get your stinkin' hand out of my wallet.

|1.12.08 @ 12:15PM|#

TWC, what did you think of Deja Vu? I really liked it, shame I couldn't bootleg it.

DW's movies have been hit or miss for me. I like Training Day, but hated John Q, Man on Fire, The Manchurianzzzzzz, I'm Gonna Git You Sucka, etc.

|1.12.08 @ 12:31PM|#

Dodsworth: To be fair, I didn't say he wrote it. But only an idiot would think that by hanging around such types, and letting him write stuff under his name, that he wouldn't bring himself up for some major scrutiny. I'll put it to you like this: if you hung around car thieves, had a website with your name on it where such car thieves talked how they stole cars, and had car thieves in major positions in your organization, you'd better not be surprised when the police keep running your tags for stolen property. I think that's the principle at hand here.

Now to be fair, his newsletters haven't altered his positions, and I also do understand that he's politically a lot closer than any of the candidates (save for maybe Obama with regard to some foreign policy matters). That said, I can't, in good conscience, hang around someone who would hang around people who'd rather bring back slavery. I think Dr. Paul's appearance on Meet the Press has proven prescient with his sloppiness, and that perhaps the movement could use a better standard-bearer. Fair enough?

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 12:44PM|#

Why aren't more of you up in arms about being subjected to Marillion.

Ick.

|1.12.08 @ 12:51PM|#

"and that perhaps the movement could use a better standard-bearer. Fair enough?"

Let me know when you find that mythical, no warts libertarian to support.

Bingo|1.12.08 @ 12:53PM|#

So whats the half-life of the whole newsletter story because I can't wait until that fades away so we can continue battering each other about different topics

Nutter|1.12.08 @ 12:58PM|#

Let me know when you find that mythical, no warts libertarian to support.

How about finding one who has a wart or two, warts that we know about and have discussed a few times over the years, and hope that the outside world hasn't noticed them.
Then when the MSM does a story about said wart, we can be outraged and lead the lynch mob against him.

dodsworth|1.12.08 @ 1:06PM|#

Todd:

Fair enough. Now, tell me the name of the "better" standardbearer among the candidates so I can sign up. Let me amend that. Give me the name of the standardbearer who is even marginally worse than Paul. Of course....failing that, we could always adopt the anarchist non-voting approach.

|1.12.08 @ 1:08PM|#

Let me know when you find that mythical, no warts libertarian to support.

Who's asking for a perfect candidate? The GOP and the Dems seem to survive with the less than perfect ones. I think Todd just wants one who won't sink after the unavoidable (if you're a credible candidate)investigation into their past.

|1.12.08 @ 1:13PM|#

Whether Ron Paul's campaign has added or subtracted to the libertarian movement is less important than the fact that he's raised awareness of the existence of anti-war ideas within conservative thought better than anyone else has done. If he's given reflexively pro-war conservatives pause for thought, then it has been worth it.

|1.12.08 @ 1:16PM|#

What? No mention of that depraved homunculus John Edwards, who has been shamelessly parading the decomposing corpse of a teenage girl (Nataline Sarkisyan) around the stage at his rallies?

|1.12.08 @ 1:32PM|#

What? No mention of that depraved homunculus John Edwards, who has been shamelessly parading the decomposing corpse of a teenage girl (Nataline Sarkisyan) around the stage at his rallies?

That was very well put. Two thumbs up!

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 2:23PM|#

You can *accuse* anyone of anything, as TNR demonstrated last week.

Worse was ex-Liberty Mag guy Virkalla telling the Economist that RP and his newsletters had the intent to foment a race war after his LP run for president failed miserably.

Yep, that'd do it. Race wars always bring peace and liberty.

No reference, no proof, no smoking gun, just a bald-faced smear asserted while under the influence of tin foil.

Or maybe it was nothing more than a Horshack-style of PC designed to make himself look good to the New Libertarian Order. Lookit Me! I knew all along! And it was worse than just racial charged newsletters!

Used to read Liberty a lot in the old days and I have lost a lot of respect for Tim. For me, he smeared hisself more than RP.

dodsworth|1.12.08 @ 2:41PM|#

J sub D:

No, Todd didn't ask for a perfect candidate to support . He only called for a "better" candidate....but still hasn't named who that is. Can you?

As to scandals, the others have quite a few which were as bad or worse. McCain, for example, called the Vietnamese gooks and still hasn't fully apologized (unlike RP) but the media has let it slide and he is now the GOP frontrunner.

RP screwed up big time but he apologized in 2001, in fact volunteered in the Texas Monthly that that he had lied in 1996 when he didn't have to.

Now, is running the most anti-racist campaign of any GOP candidate. I'll give him so slack or I'll go anarchist. There isn't much in between aside from the mythical better (not even perfect) candidate.

|1.12.08 @ 2:42PM|#

My daughter... Out of curiousity, took her to the Libertarian Purity Test website (where I score in the low 100s) and she got a perfect 160.

Didn't know whether to be proud of her, or worried that I had failed to communicate the nuances of just how difficult is would be to eliminate all government in its entirety.

This is supposed to be a parody, right?

No, DavidS, this literally happened. Not only that, my daughter then went to her civics class, where the oh-so-very liberal Democratic teacher asked the class who they wanted for President -- and gave them only two choices, HRC or Obama. So my daughter led a mini-insurrection, and asked the class if they wanted to fight the government telling us how to live their lives, and about half the class raised their hands in agreement. And then my daughter asked if the kids with their hands still down embraced the government running all aspects of their life, and all but a handful of the remaining hands went up.

I better start saving up for bail money.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

|1.12.08 @ 2:46PM|#

prolefeed- Did you get my message?

Ali, yes. I know what you were trying to say, and as always no harm was intended, I was just riffing on the image of medieval knights loading hapless Hawaiians onto catapults and chucking them at this beleagured ex-Egyptian libertarian Muslim.

Pull! (Another Hawaiian goes flying through the air)

* Ali ducks

|1.12.08 @ 3:05PM|#

Why aren't more of you up in arms about being subjected to Marillion.

Neu Mejican -- never heard his music before now, so I really enjoyed it. One of the best bonuses of hanging out here is I get exposed to hip cultural stuff that I'm highly unlikely to run across in my square meatworld life.

Re: The Libertarian Purity Test -- got a 112 on it this time. First took it a couple years ago, and got like 45 or so. I've become much more radical since then -- stuff like getting treated like a terrorist by Fatherland Security jackboots at airports tends to do that to you.

Mostly a miniarchist, in part because I don't think anyone has yet come up with a credible plan for doing away with national defense when sociopaths like Hugo Chavez or Putin or the auto mechanic running North Korea have access to advanced weaponry. That, and privitizing the courts (albeit an outline for that can be found in Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress").

Re: the "vigilante justice" thing -- I read that as saying, on occasion, it's OK to band together to stop overreaching government officials doing terrible things. In practice, though, any such show of resistence with our current government would be put down with extreme (wait for it, given the subject of recent threads) prejudice.

|1.12.08 @ 3:18PM|#

I took that test and got a 74. The "public lands" thing got me. If they were referring to National Parks, I think theres a place for them.

Jerry|1.12.08 @ 3:22PM|#

lol. You can score 141 on the Libertarian Purity Test and still be against free immigration.

Fluffy|1.12.08 @ 3:25PM|#

With regard to vigilante justice:

It's a bit of a philosophical quagmire, because on one level as simple restorative justice it's difficult to argue with it: Person A steals my stuff; I find Person A and take it back from him; did I do anything wrong?

But the issue is an epistemological one: we can't allow any one person to declare himself the all-knowing authority to make the knowledge judgments embedded in that example: whose stuff it is or was; who took it; whether they might have had some right to take it; etc. The most important distinction between state justice and private vigilante justice is due process: the presence of a [supposedly] neutral arbiter who will make a good faith effort to determine the facts as best as it can before making a determination.

I think the question "Can I justifiably take private action to punish or undo some crime against me?" is the wrong question. The right question is "Can an individual person possess the certainty needed to violently correct injustices against himself?"

I think that each person possesses a moral right to demand justice for himself privately, but that this right is actually enhanced when it is delegated to the state, because if the state provides due process the question of the quality of the individual's knowledge does not arise.

Condoleeza Rice|1.12.08 @ 3:30PM|#

I answered the quiz under two cases of consideration. I answered the quiz the first time in the context of if I was a congressman with a "libertarian streak", what positions I could take that are only moderately radical and embraced by the fringes of popular opinion. Under this "pragmatc" view, I score a 103.

When I answer honestly about the whole matter, I come out with 117. I have a big problem with the question about the law being privatised. Law is the construct of a government and does not exist under anarcho-captalism.

Nutter|1.12.08 @ 3:47PM|#

If they were referring to National Parks, I think theres a place for them.

Do you really think there would be no trees or wildlife left in the country if Big Brother wasn't benevolently (and expensively) watching over them?

|1.12.08 @ 3:55PM|#

" slightly to the right of David Duke in terms of racial policy."

Oh, I must have missed something. When did David Duke advocate freeing the tens of thousands of black men who are POWs of the war on drugs?

-jcr

|1.12.08 @ 3:59PM|#

Do you really think there would be no trees or wildlife left in the country if Big Brother wasn't benevolently (and expensively) watching over them?

No, I think there would still be wilderness. But I have a feeling the Shenandoah National Park would have bunch of housing developments dotting it if it weren't for its status as a Park, yes.

Perhaps individuals who care about the environment would buy up land to preserve. But eliminating something like National Parks would be last on the list of things to get rid of in the federal government. There are many, many worse things.

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 4:07PM|#

prolefeed,

I get exposed to hip cultural stuff that I'm highly unlikely to run across in my square meatworld life.

I recognize that musical taste is subjective, so I have no problem with you liking Marillion even if I would rather dig my fingernails off my hand with a rusty fork than listen to them...but Marillion is about as far from hip as you can get. They aren't even hip in the "so bad their hip" kinda way.

Other prog that is not hip: Gentle Giant, Triumverat, Asia, or F.M.

imho...

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 4:08PM|#

NPR is doing a story on Weekend Edition at the moment on Ron Paul...

Part of their "also running" series.

|1.12.08 @ 4:14PM|#

"Perhaps individuals who care about the environment would buy up land to preserve"

Like this, you mean?

Nah, that could never work. Everyone knows that the only way to protect the environment is by putting a gun to some landowner's head.

-jcr

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 4:14PM|#

Oops,

That was Weekend America
http://weekendamerica.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/01/11/ron_paul/

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 4:17PM|#

Cesar, pick up a copy of Free Market Environmentalism. I'd send you mine, but I just (today) donated it to someone. Figures.

Aside from that, there are some other market oriented ways to assure preservation and access.

Sage, Thanks for asking about it. I liked Deja Vu, but I pretty much enjoy Denzel Washington.

Thought it was pointless to have Val Kilmer as the # two guy though. That part could have gone to any good character actor, although I like Kilmer (think: I'm you're Huckleberry).

Favorite Denzel movie was Devil In A Blue Dress, in part because if its accurate portrayal of LA's post war black community as something other than a caricature. I'm a sucker for Chandler-esque stuff anyway plus that era was interesting anyway.

I loved the ending line:

and I sat on MY porch, with my friend, and we talked. For a very long time.

Now, off to finish the garbage disposal. I'm too old for this crap but I've learned that if you want the job done right your elected.

|1.12.08 @ 4:19PM|#

TWC, thanks for the book recommendation I'll check it out.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 4:20PM|#

JCR, nice link. The Nature Conservancy has a huge spread near me on the Santa Rosa Plateau. Unlike the BLM land nearby NC land has not been trashed by off-roaders exercising their God-given, Constitutional right to ride on everybody else's property at decibel levels approaching those of a 727 on final approach.

|1.12.08 @ 4:23PM|#

No, Todd didn't ask for a perfect candidate to support . He only called for a "better" candidate....but still hasn't named who that is. Can you?

A viable candidate? No. Is Ron Paul viable after this stuff? No. Does he help or hurt libertarianism? I dunno. He was helping until the feces impacted the rotating vanes. I'm still casting a ballot for him on Tuesday. In Michigan, nobody nut Hillary is on the Dem ballot. On the GOP side, other than Paul the pickings are awfully slim. But he handled the whole thing poorly at best, disingenuously seems more likely. He should have thrown the writer(s) under the bus in 1996 when it first came up.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 4:25PM|#

Cesar, Welcome. I am pretty sure I recall a chapter or two on National Parks.

Personally, although I hate the Sierra Club, I would sooner see them owning Yosemite than the feds. I think you could control for stewardship and for access and for preservation through deed and contract.

Nearby a rancher donated a nice big parcel of wilderness to the county for an open space park. One covenant was NO ROADS. Well, the county paved an old dirt road right through the middle of it. The family has now (many years later) demanded the road be removed under threat of taking the property back. The county solution? Make this developer move the road as a condition of developing his property that is at least five miles away. Go figure.

Now, I really do have to finish up the grabage disposal.

|1.12.08 @ 4:28PM|#

Its good to know about organizations like the NC.

One "stumbling block" for me with respect to my libertarianism is that I'm a bit of an environmentalist. Not the anti-western civilization/industrialization Greenpeace type, but the Hook-and-Bullet type.

Theres one thing for sure, though. The wealthier a society is, the better it takes care of its environment.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 4:29PM|#

I better start saving up for bail money.

I po'd my high school civics teacher by disproving his statement to the class that teachers make less than garbage collectors.

At the end of the year payback came.

TWC: Why'd I get a C?

Teach: You didn't turn in much homework.

[opens the file drawer and shows TWC the manila folder with TWC's name on it that contains about five pieces of homework for the entire semester].

I actually turned in every homework assignment. Copied them off of Carol Simon every morning.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 4:32PM|#

Cesar, I've become more of an environmentalist as I've aged. My biggest gripe in the Golden State is that the government paves and channelizes every got dam streambed it can find. Remember that scene in Grease at the end where they are racing? That's the LA River! It's not like we have a lot of trees and riparian environment anyway, I just can't see the point of paving it over. And they're still doing it.

|1.12.08 @ 4:34PM|#

And teachers should make less than garbage men. Public garbage collection is arguably a more important service than public education.

|1.12.08 @ 4:36PM|#

The reason teachers make so little as professionals is because they get so much damn vacation time. Go to year-round schooling and I bet you the salaries would go up.

Theres no need for a 10-week summer vacation anymore. It was supposed to be for farm work, but I've never seen any middle-schoolers from Henrico County working in tobacco fields recently.

|1.12.08 @ 4:36PM|#

Well, its one reason among many anyway. Then there are the teacher's unions, the lack of merit pay, etc.

|1.12.08 @ 4:38PM|#

I just can't see the point of paving it over. And they're still doing it.

Flood control? So some people can live where they normally wouldn't without massive investment of other people's money?

dodsworth|1.12.08 @ 4:46PM|#

J sub D:

Yeah, he should have done it in 1996. I think he knows that. That's why made his voluntary confession to Texas Monthly. Politicians lie and make major moral mistakes and so did RP.....but RP at least admitted the lie. He did it when the heat when he didn't have to do it.

I agree that he really screwed up but he never had a chance anyway and he knew that too....so I'm going to not only vote for him but keep working him. I can't pretend that I'll do it with the same enthusiasm, however. I know one thing: I'm not going to rationalize any decision I make but trying to claim falsehoods to ease my consience such as the one that RP rarely talked about the drug war before the debate.

|1.12.08 @ 4:51PM|#

"my daughter led a mini-insurrection"

Man, that takes me back. I did things like that in my high school US/VA government class in 10th grade. We had a mock legislature, and I got every bill of mine passed, mostly because my opponents couldn't string two coherent thoughts together.

I had an unfair advantage, though. I'd been going to schools outside the USA for most of my life before that.

-jcr

|1.12.08 @ 4:57PM|#

Is Ron Paul viable after this stuff? No.

Somewhere around 160K people disagree with you on that, and we'll just have to somehow carry on without your approval, then.

-jcr

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 4:57PM|#

J Sub, there is the flood control argument. One could also see it as a subsidy, because after the flood control project is done, the adjacent land is then useful. One such project comes to mind. It was river bottom and now, post concrete, it is railroad siding and industrial buildings that could never have been built without the tax paid concrete.

That and that the streams are generally dry much of the year.

|1.12.08 @ 4:59PM|#

RP moving up in Michigan, according to lewrockwell.com polling at 8-9% now compared to 3-5% last week.

Ali|1.12.08 @ 5:01PM|#

NM-

I am too lazy to listen to the whole thing (and possibly find out that the RP piece is not there), which one of this list of topics do you think he was mentioned in?

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:07PM|#

Prole

That's cool that you know Dick Rowland. He's an interesting guy. I met him a couple of years ago (although Mrs TWC has known him for years).

He called her on the cell about something and when he found out we were in Maui he jumped on a plane from Oahu. We met him at Kahului Airport and spent several hours over beers and lunch at some little throw-back-to-the-fifties bar on the ground floor of an office building in town.

Next time you see him mention Lisa Snell and tell him we say hi! He won't know me as TWC, only as Mr Lisa.

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 5:10PM|#

Ali,

I messed up.
It was American Public Radio not NPR.
Look down a couple posts, and I have the correct link included...complete with transcript.

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 5:11PM|#

Ali,

Here it is again
http://weekendamerica.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/01/11/ron_paul/

Ali|1.12.08 @ 5:12PM|#

NM- Thanks.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:18PM|#

Prole

Is that you? Writing op-eds for the Hawaii Reporter?

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:19PM|#

Damn that html

|1.12.08 @ 5:20PM|#

Cesar
You think the teachers unions have caused teacher's low pay? Unions may do a lot of things you guys don't like, but lower the wages of their members? I'd like to hear how that happened...
"Do you really think there would be no trees or wildlife left in the country if Big Brother wasn't benevolently (and expensively) watching over them?"

There would be, but poor folks would not be able to go on it...

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 5:24PM|#

One more example of how Ron Paul would have done better running as a democrat...

"The majority of mainstream media is owned by just a handful of corporations," he says. "They've got their talking points. They've been given instructions on who to give coverage to and who not to. And Ron Paul threatens the status quo. A lot of money stands to be lost if the ideas of Ron Paul ever get implemented in this country."

|1.12.08 @ 5:27PM|#

Damn that html
TWC,
Go here.
;-)

xmiller|1.12.08 @ 5:29PM|#

Eric Dondero wrote for the newsletters.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:29PM|#

There would be, but poor folks would not be able to go on it...

You mean like those poor folks I saw literally taking a bath in the creek at Oak Creek Canyon near Sedona?

If ever there was an argument for privatization, that was it for me.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:30PM|#

LOL, my dog is better at many things than I.

|1.12.08 @ 5:31PM|#

You think the teachers unions have caused teacher's low pay? Unions may do a lot of things you guys don't like, but lower the wages of their members? I'd like to hear how that happened...

MNG, they make the transition to year-round schooling impossible because they bitch about their vacation time. They won't allow merit pay, which holds down the pay of their members. I could go on.

Basically, by allowing zero competition and a short working year they screw themselves over.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:34PM|#

I think Eric Dondero may have orchestrated the events that blew RP out of the water. I might be joking as, I assume, you are, but he has motive and likely has the evidence.

When Kos was making allegations a few weeks before Christmas I could not find one site on the internet with hard evidence (did not do a Lexxis search).

Then, boom, TNR has all the goods.

Bingo|1.12.08 @ 5:35PM|#

Does anyone here have a Nike+iPod kit? I picked up one of those today and it's really cool. Best part is the sultry female at the end that purrs your workout summary into your ears. Gotta stay fit for the cosmotarian cocktail parties ;)

|1.12.08 @ 5:37PM|#

Maybe Edward did it.

|1.12.08 @ 5:41PM|#

Cesar
Well, the chief thing they fight for is, well, pay raises...Merit pay would not necessarily raise the AVERAGE teacher pay...

I've seen folks on H&R moan about how teachers unions protect incompetent members. Well, first of all most teacher's "unions" are not unions but voluntary organizations that do not collectively bargain. Secondly, most unions form to combat arbitrary and preferential managerial techniques. Now you want to see "protection of incompetents" take a look at nepotism and favoritism in management...

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:42PM|#

Actually, teachers are not underpaid. At least not in the Golden State. That is a continuing myth perpetrated by the Teacher Unions.

The only caveat is that entry level teacher salaries in k-12 tend to be on the low side, but once a teacher has a few years in, the pay is generous indeed. With killer vacation time, virtually unmatched retirement bennies, and the opportunity to spend time with the promise of the Promised Land (your kids).

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 5:43PM|#

Maybe Edward is Eric Dondero in drag.

|1.12.08 @ 5:44PM|#

I don't care about average pay. I care about good teachers getting paid more, and the incompetent ones getting fired.

In my high school I had a few wonderful techers, and many many many totally incompetent and/or burned out ones. And guess what? They got paid based on the amount of time they had been teaching, not how good they were.

Its also interesting the best teachers I had had done something previous in life before teaching high school. The life-long "professional" teachers tended to be the worst.

Ali|1.12.08 @ 5:51PM|#

I actually let my inner conspiracist (is that a word?) out the box and asked "what if Eric Dondero did write the letter?" Firstly, the kind of language displayed there does in fact sound like something that Eric would write*. If it is him, then, why would Dr. Paul not release his name and also say that he kicked him out? Well, I think the answer would be clear. He did not because Eric would deny it (extrapolate the scenario at will), and ultimately Dr. Paul could look foolish and the whole thing get out of hand. So he decides to take the damage in and control it.

*Eric, if you are reading this, just remember this is just the inner conspiracist operating in Ali's mind and not Ali himself

|1.12.08 @ 6:19PM|#

I've seen folks on H&R moan about how teachers unions protect incompetent members. Well, first of all most teacher's "unions" are not unions but voluntary organizations that do not collectively bargain.

Maybe so, but here in Detroit, Michigan they most certainly do. They strike as well, even though they (teacher strikes) are illegal in the state. It is also de facto impossible to fire a teacher in Detroit Public Schools short of rape (statuatory or otherwise), murder, or drug dealing to students. Incompetence will not get you fired. Extreme incompetence will get you removed from teaching duties but won't interfere with your paycheck.

Neu Mejican|1.12.08 @ 6:22PM|#

In my career in education, it has been my experience that teachers unions tend to do collective bargaining.

They also tend to be dominated by non-teacher members (cafeteria workers, secretaries, etc...) that work in school settings, and tend to focus primarily on increasing salaries.

|1.12.08 @ 6:36PM|#

They also tend to be dominated by non-teacher members (cafeteria workers, secretaries, etc...) that work in school settings, and tend to focus primarily on increasing salaries.

I don't doubt you Neu, but why. I'm a teacher, a college educated professional, often with a masters. Why would I throw my lot in with the folks who clean the boy's lavatory and almost poison the children (I remember) for a living. Is it some sort of solidarity thing?

SIV|1.12.08 @ 6:49PM|#

One more example of how Ron Paul would have done better running as a democrat...


Uh....Yeah, the most right wing presidential candidate running in the Democrat party primary.
I'm sure his Republican constituents down in Texas would have appreciated that almost as much as Democrat voters.

|1.12.08 @ 7:05PM|#

Cesar
Aren't you from Richmond, VA? My parents live near there. I seriously doubt there are any "teachers unions" doing ANY collective bargaining there. Those incompetents are brought to you by stupid management my friend.

And why do you think those same managers would be able to wisely determine who gets the merit pay and who does not?

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 7:06PM|#

Speaking of Global Warming

tip of the glass to the Kosmik Kid

|1.12.08 @ 7:08PM|#

And why do you think those same managers would be able to wisely determine who gets the merit pay and who does not?

I'd like (at least at the high school level) a combination of student evaluations, administrative evaluations, and satatistics such as pass/fail rates and test scores taken into account for merit.

You know, whats done at the University level where there have been (in my limited experience) fewer incompetents*

*Yes, there are problems with the tenure system. But I think everyone can agree that our university system is light years ahead of our secondary public school system..

|1.12.08 @ 7:12PM|#

Cesar
Unions are active in many higher educational systems, btw. In fact, the American Federation of Teachers represents many of them...

But I hope you got my point that no "teachers union" was dictating anything in your Richmond, VA school...Are you confusing the VEA with something like the AFT?

|1.12.08 @ 7:15PM|#

"I'd like (at least at the high school level) a combination of student evaluations, administrative evaluations, and satatistics such as pass/fail rates and test scores taken into account for merit."

Wouldn't you have to take into account that many teachers teach harder, less popular subjects and so their test scores, student evals, etc. would be lower? How would that be balanced? Are "teachers unions" (whatever you think they are) opposed to that kind of thing, or just to arbitrary management decisions about personnel (and sometimes protections against the latter may seem to get in the way of the former).

No offence, but I think this stuff is way more complicated than the standard Cato talking points let on...

|1.12.08 @ 7:17PM|#

How do you compare teacher A in crappy area B where the kids are destitute and whose parents are a collection of crack whores and absent dads in trailer parks and teacher D in rich area E teaching the same subject? Do they take the same test? WTF is that?

|1.12.08 @ 7:20PM|#

MNG-

No, this isn't a Union state thank God. But theres still tremendous political pressure to block things like merit pay, evaluations, and competition from private schools in the form of vouchers or anything else for that matter.

Public school teachers are untouchable saints in the political arena, while the reality on the ground is another matter entirely.

Despite the objections you bring up--such as incompetent management--its worth a shot compared to the failing system there is in place now. FWIW I think the management should be subject to evaluations by the teachers and the state as well.

Are you saying everything is fine and dandy in our public school system? Or that it just needs more money? More and more money is thrown at it but it doesn't seem to do any good. Time to change the structure I say.

How do you compare teacher A in crappy area B where the kids are destitute and whose parents are a collection of crack whores and absent dads in trailer parks and teacher D in rich area E teaching the same subject? Do they take the same test? WTF is that?

That would be taken into account by the people doing the evaluations. Raising test scores in, say, Petersburg should merit a much bigger pay raise than raising test scores in NOVAville.

|1.12.08 @ 7:25PM|#

J sub D: At least Michigan fired teachers after drug dealing. In my hometown of NYC, a teacher got convicted of felony drug dealing...and got her job back after serving her sentence. If only they were only so lucky.

To the rest: I honestly don't know who would be a good libertarian candidate. Honestly, we're back where we started before RP, with a year shaved off the calendar to boot. While the movement has a good preacher and scholar class, we need more evangelists to take the movement to the people. Reason and CATO are tinkering around the edges, but we need something along the lines of a Christian Coalition or a GOPAC to influence political parties and build the infrastructure of a major libertarian movement within an extant 2 party system. (Though I wouldn't be against the LP taking the lead if we could get the rules to open up the ballot box to them more.)

|1.12.08 @ 7:26PM|#

Todd-

Jeff Flake is pretty decent.

|1.12.08 @ 7:37PM|#

Taking on the Kochtopus:

Karen de Coster's take on cosmolibertarians is worth reading.

http://www.karendecoster.com/blog/archives/002714.html

|1.12.08 @ 7:39PM|#

Stop with the cocktail party horseshit. I'm not a paleo/neo-confederate, but I'm hardly inside-the-beltway.

|1.12.08 @ 7:45PM|#

"No, this isn't a Union state thank God." Yeah, in avoiding the horrors of having protections from arbitrary management decisions and more say in the place you probably spend most of your weekday waking hours, you must be thankful daily...

"But theres still tremendous political pressure to block things like merit pay, evaluations, and competition from private schools in the form of vouchers or anything else for that matter." We call that an "interest group."

"Despite the objections you bring up--such as incompetent management--its worth a shot compared to the failing system there is in place now." How do you know? It could always be worse...

For that matter, how do we know schools are doing so poorly? Poorly compared to what?

"That would be taken into account by the people doing the evaluations. Raising test scores in, say, Petersburg should merit a much bigger pay raise than raising test scores in NOVAville." If I remember VA has the SOL's, and they are the same test for all locales...

Guy Montag|1.12.08 @ 7:48PM|#

Cesar,

Did you make the gathering last night?

|1.12.08 @ 7:49PM|#

No offence, but I think this stuff is way more complicated than the standard Cato talking points let on...

More complicated than grading/ranking colonels to decide who becomes a brigadier general? I think not.

|1.12.08 @ 7:51PM|#

Yeah, in avoiding the horrors of having protections from arbitrary management decisions and more say in the place you probably spend most of your weekday waking hours, you must be thankful daily...

Yes MNG, the depressed cities of Houston, Charlotte and Atlanta should envy the roaring economies of thoroughly unionized Detroit and Pittsburgh. /sarcasm

If I remember VA has the SOL's, and they are the same test for all locales...

The SOLs are more government control, not less. I want less control from Washington and the state capitals, not more.

|1.12.08 @ 7:52PM|#

Guy Montag-

I thought class warfare was for liberals.

|1.12.08 @ 7:53PM|#

Cognitive dissonance is the most powerful force in the universe.

For foolish monkey troupe styled politics, "Ron Paul is a Racist" is only topped by the bullshit signs used to con the public into endorsing the Bush league's imperial adventure in Iraq:

"Support Our Troops, Liberate Iraq"

|1.12.08 @ 7:58PM|#

For that matter, how do we know schools are doing so poorly? Poorly compared to what?

In math and science, the rest of the indusrialized world. Do I have to go google it? Oh heck, here, and here.

|1.12.08 @ 8:01PM|#

But I hear we're way better in self esteem. [/sarcasm]

|1.12.08 @ 8:19PM|#

But I hear we're way better in self esteem. [/sarcasm]

Oh God. I was in school during the height of the "self-esteem" bullshit. Now I hear employers think my generation expects affirmation constantly and has a huge sense of entitlement. I wonder why!

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 8:34PM|#

Nice, couple of tangents

1. The worst schools in LAUSD draw from the demographic you describe and the Catholic schools in that part draw from the exact same demographic.

Catholic schools teach and have ZERO discipline problems. LAUSD, not so good.

That's from a study Mrs TWC a few years back.

2. SF City Schools implemented open enrollment in public schools. Test scores have risen dramatically as crack whores take their kids to better schools in other neighborhoods. Just a modicum of competition improves test scores.

Also from a piece by Mrs TWC

Lokkit me, dropping names.

|1.12.08 @ 9:20PM|#

"In math and science, the rest of the indusrialized world. Do I have to go google it? Oh heck, here, and here."

Uhh, J Sub D, were they comparable samples? I mean, if we test everybody and they test the top 10%, and their tests are higher, then DUH. That says little about the quality of our pedagogy...

Cesar
C'mon, I know you are one of the more fair minded and smarter guys on this site. You want me to cite heavily unionized places that make Houston look like an undynamic dump? OK, how about NYC, the most dynamic city in the world (heavily regulated, taxed and unionized btw, take THAT Hayek).

|1.12.08 @ 9:22PM|#

Do I have to name all the cultural icons and academic lights that came up through NYC public institutions compared to Houston's? I didn't thin it...

And, if our higher ed is so much better than the worlds, but our higher ed has a fair amount of unionization too, then...

D'oh! Cato talking points not sufficient!

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 9:25PM|#

take THAT Hayek

Not sure if that wins the thread, but it's pretty funny.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 9:29PM|#

The House Un-American Activities Committee is back, and it's called Cosmopolitan "Libertarianism."

LOL--that's from Karen courtesy of Paleo at the Cocktail Party

So Paleo? Is she cute?

Guy Montag|1.12.08 @ 9:29PM|#

Cesar,

Montag-

I thought class warfare was for liberals.

Nobody shot at us when we were lighting cigars with a $10 bill.

|1.12.08 @ 9:35PM|#

Any Paul supporter that claims the newsletter story was a media conspiracy against his campaign (as mentioned in an earlier comment) has been reading too many "libertarian" websites. I've actually been surprised at how little attention the big media outlets have paid to this story. If this was a conspiracy for the reason of hurting Paul's support, it was only meant to hurt his "libertarian" support. Although, that's not as far fetched since it appears more and more likely that this story was made possible by "libertarians" in the first place (TWC, I don't mean Dondero).

There are a couple points about all of the "libertarian" response to the issue that, while not surprising, still don't make sense to me.

The first being the use of the word "support" (as in "I can no longer support Paul" or "I'm ashamed to have supported Paul"). I have to assume these people mean "support" as in, "I'm going to vote for him in the primary". If that's correct, I am curious as to why they "support" candidates. I have a lot of issues with Paul personally (the newsletter issue being only one) but I've never felt disappointed by any of them, nor have I considered not "supporting" him because of them. I choose who I support politically based on how I think they would do their job. It's no different than the contractor I use to do work on my house. He does high quality work and works at a fair price so I keep hiring him. If someone were to tell me that, when he goes home, he makes racist jokes about me, I'd definitely think different of him personally but I would not turn around and pay more money to a different contractor for lower quality work (in other words, spite myself to spite him). Since there is no other option for a "libertarian" to support, I'm guessing when they say they can no longer "support" Paul, that means they won't be voting in the Democrat or Republican Primaries. I say guess because none of these authors ever make it clear what they mean by "support". Based on the emotional response, it appears many of these authors had put Paul up on some pedestal and, of that, I can understand feeling ashamed. It's still no excuse to not "support" him.

The second issue people bring up, Paul's representation of "libertarianism", is even more absurd. Sure, I'd rather have Lysander Spooner to vote for (although, I'm sure he would be equally unacceptable to many "libertarians" because supporting the south's secession would make "libertarians" appear racist) but beggars can't be choosers. You don't get many oppurtunities to expose this many new people to libertarian ideas so, when you do, it's foolish not to take advantage of it. Before RP, most non-libertarians I met here in Atlanta thought all libertarians supported the Iraq war (Neal Boortz is big here). In fact, wherever I've lived (NY, NJ, VA, GA), the common perception of libertarian thought has always been that its only accepted by people from the fringe. I wish I knew of the "libertarian" movement that had so much to lose that it needed to be protected from Ron Paul. I would join immediately! Sadly, it's just a portion of the same movement. A portion that happens to care more about how their statist friends perceive "libertarians" than actually having an effect on the size of government.

Please forgive the rant. I just finished reading almost a weeks worth of H&R.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 9:43PM|#

I'm setting a really bad example for my son, who had to go down to his buddy Nick's house where the PLAYOFFS are actually on TV.

Big Sigh. Lost track of football a while back.

What?

Whaddya mean the Colts don't play in Baltimore anymore.

|1.12.08 @ 9:47PM|#

I actually like Hayek...But Jesus, the man, nor no man, is God...And I think he would have agreed with that!

One of the best Reason posts ever was when they commented on some libertarian (or more likely Chamber of Commerce, the two get confused sometimes) think tank's ranking of "most free market places to live" and Wichita, KS (very little taxes and regulation)was like number 2 and NYC (very much taxes and regulation) was like the last....Reason said "well, hell, there is more to life than economic liberty, I would MUCH prefer NYC to Wichita." I would have said "duh" had I not known so many ultra-libertarians, all of whom would have been massively unhappy living in Wichita and stimulated by NYC...But hey, abstract and simple fomular MUST rule the day, by God!

Let justice be done, though the heavens FALL!

|1.12.08 @ 9:48PM|#

TWC-That is just plain sad...One can have politics and sports...The Evil Jags have the Pats tied right now, for example....Go PATS!

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 9:50PM|#

Well said, Franklin.

The inner circle are having puppies. The next tier of RP supporters, not so much.

I fear he's dead in the water, but, as you say, who, exactly, are you going to vote for? Well, I'm still pulling the lever for RP and, later, the LP.

None of this divided government fantasy or Obama as libertarian fantasy. If I'm going to get cold cocked anyway, I damn sure ain't giving the guy permission to swing for my jaw with the Louisville Slugger.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.12.08 @ 9:53PM|#

Nice, I know, just sad. I loved playing sandlot football when I was a kid. I don't know what happened. I did teach the boy how to throw the football though. How to swing a bat and shoot hoops. But I think my Real Man card got revoked. When I swipe it in the machine it comes up expired.

I still like girls though. :-)

|1.12.08 @ 9:54PM|#

I'm not a libertarian, but libertarians would be crazy not to vote for Paul...He's your Eugene Debs...There has not been, and will not be, another candidate who is as consistently libertarian as he is (despite his immigration, abortion, gay rights problems)...
Voting for him says you agree with his well known message, which does not include his admittedly crazy and awful newsletters a decade ago (and the man is a foll either way for either knowing of such nonsense and allowing it or being negligent of such shenanigans in his name)...

A person votes for policy, imo...

|1.12.08 @ 9:57PM|#

I meant "fool"

I really think that any honest observer would see a vote for RP as a vote for what most libertarians believe in...I'm not a libertarian, so he won't get my vote, but that is what I would think, not that a vote for him is a vote for a paranoid racist...That is very esoteric knowledge (about 2% of the American public knows what TNR is).

Ali|1.12.08 @ 10:04PM|#

Franklin- That was very well said!

Dodsworth|1.12.08 @ 11:46PM|#

I wonder what the take of the forthcoming article on RP for Reason. I'll bet dollars to donuts that it will spin the old news in the form of a "big news scoop" "exposing" RP's "new" sins.

It may be along the lines of Matt Welch's piece which made much ado out of RP's initial 1996 denials, a story that was reported eight years ago in the Texas Monthly! Did Virginia order that packaging? The important think for me is that RP freely confessed to the reporter from that publication in 2001 when it had been safely re-elected for this third term. He apologized as well. What more do we need?

I don't think it is important to know who wrote the damn thing. I don't even think it is all that important to know who edited it. If the latter was Rockwell, it should be noted that Rockwell has considerably moderated his views since then at least if some of the pro-MLK articles are any indication. I hold no brief for him, but given this change, what is to be gained by cutting all ties with him or making him some sort of pariah?

As I understand it, Rockwell has no official ties with the campaign anyway and rarely talks with RP. I suppose RP could take it to a new level and refuse to talk with him ever again....but what would be the benefit of that?

|1.13.08 @ 12:32AM|#

In a way, constitutionalism is a form of nativism. A 'gov't of…, for…, and by the people' is unique to the USA. I suppose world gov't wouldn't be such a dirty word to so many if such a world gov't weren't based on a document such as our constitution. Instead the UN Charter and the 'constitutions' of the rest of the world are based on the centralized top-down approach favored by the non-libertarian majority in our country and the world. How often do we see new books or commentaries calling for a new 'Constitutional Convention' that plans to gut it of the 'of, for, by' part?

The xenophobic aspects (NAFTA superhighway) of the Ron Paul campaign stem from nativism. It's the stuff of conspiracy theorists or in its more apologetic form tuned down for the campaign, loss of sovereignty. The anti-immigration stance seems to rest on the larger anti-welfare-state stance but could as easily come from a fear of not-just-amnesty but amnesty-suffrage. The 'Tancredoistic' part is inexcusable: Hispanics, whatever that is other than multi-'racial' people like us fleeing the economic peril handed them by oligarchs, replacing us, whatever 'us' is.

We are at a curious crossroads. The Ron Paul candidacy has seen a pulling of resources between 'palaeocons' (borrowing a term) and classical libertarians (newcomers are unaware of the dichotomy), as both see that the constitution approach is the best way to go. Federally mandated libertarianism is an oxymoron unless couched in the terms of the Constitution. Why I personally don't fear the paeleocon influence in the RP campaign is that the majority of Americans would reject that influence assuming it ever got beyond at best 10%, much less the Republican nomination or presidency. If anything the RP campaign represents a capitulation by the 'palaeocons', assuming RP is truly their unique representative, to the larger issues of Libertarianism. The 'movement' refers to this spur-of-the-moment 'under-the-big-top'-sized tent that has taken all by surprise and snowballed.

The appeal of libertarianism for the palaeocon is not: 'Wow, now we get gay marriage!' or 'Isn't it great! My nanny is teaching my kid Spanish!' It is 'Now I can home-school my kids free from the evil influences of Darwinism and multiculturalism.' And 'I don't have to pay for those darned liberals' penchant for social welfare.'

That is our connection with the palaeocon. We say, 'Hey if that's their trip.' But we also say that about a pot-smoking hippie enclave or Rennaisance Fair-attending Wiccans. I don't hear too many 'liberals' echoing that.

The RP letter-gate, to use that annoying suffix, can become a positive thing, if we reassess where we stand.

If we think the candidacy is a ploy to institute a basket of 'orthodox' religions as the state religion, kill the teaching of Darwinism and keep the minority down, then it doesn't deserve our support. (But doesn't anyone think the Huckabee approach is much more effective for those ends?)

If we think that in this PC world, we cannot ever defend ourselves from being 'guilty-by-association' the way we mostly accuse RP on the letter issue, then by all means to keep ourselves pure we must disassociate ourselves from the campaign completely and wait for a better day.

As for me, I would be impressed if the Cato and the Reason writers could say in effect: "Our consistent on-record repudiation of all-things racist withstanding, we still find this candidacy to embody the 'live-and-let-live' principles we stand for better than all the rest. Even considering the RP letter issue, we feel it is a stain on your favorite campaign if you find RP as some of us do to be of lower virtue than your candidate. We are issue-oriented not candidate-oriented. We are giving considerable leeway here, but not nearly as much as we would for your candidate."

But I also understand that when a column puts food on the table, one has to be way more careful than I do. Compromises suck when one compromises his principles, but if lining up behind any candidate automatically means a compromise of one's principles, then the principled will never be truly represented by anyone because that anyone will never be elected anywhere or at anytime.

It's a risky road I know, but cover your tracks (instead of your asses) with reservations and the disclosure you have demanded of your candidate and you'll never be sorry. You'll be sorrier when all is lost to the candidate that 'lived right' but delivered you down the path of authoritarianism.

rEVOLutionary | yranoituLOVEr|1.13.08 @ 12:39AM|#

(Squire/Anderson/Rabin)

You can fool yourself
You can cheat until you're blind
You can cut your heart
It can happen

You can mend the wires
You can feed the soul apart

You reach

It can happen to you
It can happen to me
It can happen to everyone eventually

It's a constant fight
A constant fight
You're pushing the needle to the red
Black and white
Who knows who's right
No substitute you're born you're dead
Fly by night
Created out of fantasy
Our destinations call

Look up - Look down
Look out - Look around
Look up - Look down
There's a crazy world outside
We're not about to lose our pride

...

This world I like
We architects of life
A song a sigh
Developing words that linger
Through fields of green
Through open eyes
This for us to see

Yes - It Can Happen.mp3

|1.13.08 @ 12:46AM|#

David S.

vigilantism occurs when justice breaks down; 'vigilante justice' is an oxymoron. Absolute 'purity' is absurd because achieving it is as impossible as absolute zero or dividing by zero. Getting closer should be the goal.

|1.13.08 @ 12:51AM|#

Tarran, if people could just accept that they are assholes like the other people they call assholes, we'd all be better off. Isn't that the heart of libertarianism.

|1.13.08 @ 1:06AM|#

prolefeed,

best summary of Romney/Mormonism seen yet. Surely your'e an insider (ex-Mormon, ex-Utah) that's really an outsider. But you get the big picture.

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 1:27AM|#

SIV,

Uh....Yeah, the most right wing presidential candidate running in the Democrat party primary.

Sorry, but this guy that is running his ass off to get Paul elected in Montana is using the same talking points about corporate control of the media that I hear on Pacifica radio...add in the anti-war, anti-war on drugs, anti-patriot act and you end up a good fringe democrat.

Paul/Kucinich 2008

They agree on more policy points than they disagree...if you squint just right.

;^)

mavis|1.13.08 @ 1:49AM|#

Neu Mejican,

You're an idiot if you can't tell the difference between a do-gooder socialist statist like Kucinich and a libertarian Republican like Ron Paul.
Paul is against taxes, against excessive spending, pro-gun, and anti-abortion...that's 4 positions already...more than the 3 points you mention.

|1.13.08 @ 2:18AM|#

"For that matter, how do we know schools are doing so poorly? Poorly compared to what?"

You're kidding, right?

-jcr

|1.13.08 @ 2:28AM|#

"I think everyone can agree that our university system is light years ahead of our secondary public school system.'

The reason for this is obvious. At the university level, we have competition.

-jcr

|1.13.08 @ 2:30AM|#

" I see him getting the bulk of the AA vote there."

Are there really enough people in 12-step programs to make a difference in the outcome? Also, why would recovering drunks support Obama in particular over Hillary?

-jcr

|1.13.08 @ 3:35AM|#

I can't believe it - jcr cracked a funny. Alcoholics Annonymous, indeed!

;-)

BakedPenguin|1.13.08 @ 8:57AM|#

I have to assume these people mean "support" as in, "I'm going to vote for him in the primary"

I'm one of the people who said this. You're right, "support" is somewhat nebulous. I meant it as "I was going to go to meetup groups, give more money, and do work for a campaign I thought was mostly good.

Now, I will simply vote for the lesser evil - Paul"

MSM|1.13.08 @ 10:17AM|#

How dare the Obama campaign egage in shady politics to suggest Hillary Clinton is using race in the campaign. Hillary freed the slaves and ended Jim Crow. Obama is nothing but a BLACK demagogue

libertreee|1.13.08 @ 11:04AM|#

For that matter, how do we know schools are doing so poorly? Poorly compared to what?

The monopoly dilemna in a nutshell. When you have a monopoly, you have no (or little or handicapped) competition. So, what examples do you have for comparison?

Even more to the point, the question reveals a producer oriented POV. The producer can always say "What?". It is up to the consumer to say: "I'm leaving, that's what." If the consumer has no place to go, obviously the producer has no market feedback. So, he can afford to sit back and say "What?"

Ali|1.13.08 @ 11:06AM|#

prolefeed?

You, Lew Rockwell, Out of the |1.13.08 @ 11:21AM|#

Dear Lew,

You have now had three opportunities -1996, 2001, and 2008 - to prove that you are a friend of Ron Paul and freedom, and you have failed to do so each time.

This week, for the third time, the puerile, racist, and completely un-Pauline comments that all informed people say you have caused to appear in Ron's newsletters over the course of several years have become an issue in his campaign. This time the stakes are even higher than before. He is seeking nationwide office, the Republican nomination for President, and his campaign is attracting millions of supporters, not tens of thousands.

Three times you have failed to come forward and admit responsibility for and complicity in the scandals. You have allowed Ron to twist slowly in the wind. Because of your silence, Ron has been forced to issue repeated statements of denial, to answer repeated questions in multiple interviews, and to be embarrassed on national television. Your callous disregard for both Ron and his millions of supporters is unconscionable.

If you were Dr. Paul's friend, or a friend of freedom, as you pretend to be, by now you would have stepped forward, assumed responsibility for those asinine and harmful comments, resigned from any connection to Ron or his campaign, and relieved Ron of the burden of having to repeatedly deny the charges of racism. But you have not done so, and so the scandal continues to detract from Ron's message.

You know as well as I do that Ron does not have a racist bone in his body, yet those racist remarks went out under his name, not yours. Pretty clever. But now it's time to man up, Lew. Admit your role, and exonerate Ron. You should have done it years ago.

John Robbins, Ph.D.
Chief of Staff
Dr. Ron Paul, 1981-1985
http://godshammer.wordpress.com/2008/01/12/open-letter-to-lew-rockwell/

libertreee|1.13.08 @ 11:22AM|#

Law is the construct of a government and does not exist under anarcho-captalism.

Uh-incorrect. Law is created through the habits and customs of the people. Government's codify the law, often twisting it to their own advantage.

I could mention, for example, the American Indians, and by extension, all other aboriginal societies, with very little of what we call government, and with customary law.

A good example for today is Somalia, where the
African unwritten, unlegislated tribal law, called XEER, was reinstated by deliberate choice in 1992, and the government was turned out.

Even in the Southern part of Somalia, near Mogadishu, where chaos exists due to foreign intervention, the Islamic Courts presented another alternative, non governmental law.

Statutory law by legislature easily results in legal positivism, whereby any law, no matter how absurd, is considered a valid law if legislated.

libertreee|1.13.08 @ 11:27AM|#

That said, I can't, in good conscience, hang around someone who would hang around people who'd rather bring back slavery.

WTF? Like un PC ragging on MLK and Rodney King and black criminals is about bringing back slavery?

Oh, that the South had a right to seceede is about bringing back slavery?

Give me a break!

DavidS|1.13.08 @ 11:44AM|#

A good example for today is Somalia

Somalia aslibertarian nirvana?

tarran|1.13.08 @ 12:13PM|#

David S.

There have been a bunch of studies on Somalia looking at the stateless period.

They all suffer from flaws. First, for a variety of reasons most studies fail to diffrentiate between Northern and Southern Somalia. Northern Somalia has a government that nobody recognizes. It performs all the governmenty functions of law-giving and enforcement. Northern Somalia also happens to be the more prosperous part.

The South on the other hand is where the real action was, economically speaking. It showed the highest growth, although the economic situation was far less stable there.

Anyway, the consensus in the studies I've read is that
1) Somalis were better off under the anarchy than under the Marxist government thrown out in the early 1990's
2) The measures of standards of living (such as life expectancy, education, income etc) were catching up to those of their neighbors or, in some cases, exceeding those of their neighbors
3) Many of the problems in Somalia were badly exarcebated by outside intervention, usually in the form of attempts to establish a modern nation state under the UN aegis.

Here is a pretty good paper on the place:
Better Off Stateless by Peter Leeson

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 12:30PM|#

Mavis,

can't tell the difference between a do-gooder socialist statist like Kucinich and a libertarian Republican like Ron Paul.

Who said I couldn't tell the difference?
I said that Paul's positions would have (are having) as much or more resonance among Democrats (or left leaning independents) than Republicans...due to/to the extent that, (listen/read carefully) there are areas/issues where his positions agree with folks like Kucinich.

There are, of course, obvious differences as well.

DavidS|1.13.08 @ 12:43PM|#

Tarran - thanks for the ref - will read with interest.

Fluffy|1.13.08 @ 12:59PM|#

Government's codify the law, often twisting it to their own advantage.

Actually, historically it was the reverse.

Codes of laws came about because of pressure from below. "Tradition" as law tends to empower aristocratic classes who declare spurious traditions, "interpret" existing traditions, or simply resort to forgery, deception, and memory-corruption in order to twist non-written law systems to their advantage. Popular movements [sometimes led by king-figures who are typically struggling with aristocratic classes for political power] demand written and codified law because it's more fair.

Statutory law by legislature easily results in legal positivism, whereby any law, no matter how absurd, is considered a valid law if legislated.

Non-statutory law brutalizes the individual by denying him the ability to be sure if his actions are legal at any particular moment in time. And you don't think that "tradition" has ever produced an absurd outcome? Law may be good or bad, but "tradition" is almost always crap.

|1.13.08 @ 2:06PM|#

You, Lew Rockwell, Out of the Pool! | January 13, 2008, 11:21am

Don't sugarcoat it, Doctor. Say what tou really think. ;-)

Seriously, I have no doubt that the good doctor's missive will come to Mr. Rockwell's attention. I would appreciate knowing Lew Rockwell's comments.

Lew? The ball is in your court.

|1.13.08 @ 2:11PM|#

Recent poll results for Michigan's Tuesday primary.

John McCain, 27 percent
Mitt Romney, 26 percent
Mike Huckabee, 19 percent
Rudy Giuliani, 6 percent
Fred Thompson, 5 percent

Things aren't exactly looking up for Rudy.

Ali|1.13.08 @ 2:13PM|#

No Paul?

|1.13.08 @ 2:21PM|#

No Paul?

This shows Ron Paul at 5%. I'm pretty sure it's from the same poll.

It wouldn't be too much to ask for the Freep to post the complete poll results, would it?

Ali|1.13.08 @ 2:26PM|#

J sub D, I guess not.

By the way, I came across this article on HNN on the letter debacle. Probably the most objective I have seen so far.

´Î´|1.13.08 @ 2:28PM|#

http://www.aumha.org/arcane/ccxx2.htm#27

Jon|1.13.08 @ 2:31PM|#

Michigan polls from ARG, Mitchell Research, and Rasmussen on lewrockwell.com yesterday showed RP doing better at 8-9%, ahead of Guiliani and Thompson.

|1.13.08 @ 3:05PM|#

Folks, I'm shocked. Reason has gone a whole day without a blog post on the Ron Paul newsletters? What's going on here? They're not dropping the ball, are they? This dead horse needs to be daily flogged for at least another two weeks.

|1.13.08 @ 3:20PM|#

This dead horse needs to be daily flogged for at least another two weeks.

Yeah, the self examination and discussion by the libertarian community is sooo ridiculous. You'd never see the GOP do it about Trent Lott. Th Dems are fine with Al Sharpton. Why should we care about inconsistencies, and a (perceived?) lack of candidness, in one of our own? What do we think we are? Moral or something?

|1.13.08 @ 3:35PM|#

Allow me to provide Jon's links... ARG Poll, Rasmussen Poll, Mitchell Poll.

Since the DNC has stripped Michigan of their delegates (Obama & Edwards aren't even on the ballot), it will be interesting to see how many Democrats end up voting in the Republican Primary. If I'm not mistaken, Florida has also been stripped of their delegates by the DNC and a liberal infusion in either of these contests could really effect the outcome. Hopefully, people like this have some success.

In 2006, here in Atlanta, Cynthia McKinney won the Democratic Primary with 48% of the vote. Because she won with less than 50%, there was a runoff. In the runoff, 8,000 more votes were cast than were cast in the primary and almost all of those 8,000 were cast by Republicans for her opponent. Needless to say, her opponent won handily (and also became the 2nd Buddhist to serve in Congress). Democrats in Michigan and Florida have been given a rare opportunity to stick it to the Republicans. Lets hope they take advantage of it.

Guy Montag|1.13.08 @ 5:04PM|#

Atlanta sending a Buddhist to the Congress is cause for you to wish the Democrats "stick it" to the Republicans?

Former Ron Paul supporter,now |1.13.08 @ 5:27PM|#

Former Lew Rockwell columnist Wendy McElroy [http://www.wendymcelroy.com/news.php] has let us know that she considers the racism intolerable:

The short answer is, my comments are not addressed to Paul, or to Paul's Republican supporters, I'm speaking to Paul's libertarian supporters. Specifically, to those who have abandoned their principled stand against government of any kind, who offer the explanation that, in Paul's hands, government will be a force for good.

(She's also called on Rockwell to admit his role in promoting racism)

Nutter|1.13.08 @ 5:32PM|#

The Dems are fine with Al Sharpton

OK, since you mention Sharpton, where has he been during the past week? You'd think he'd be on top of the newsletter story and trying to smear not just RP but the Republicans.

Jon|1.13.08 @ 6:39PM|#

Why has McElroy waited until now to disassociate herself, if she has known the identity of the author all this time? This bandwagon is getting awfully crowded.

|1.13.08 @ 6:40PM|#

Nutter,

You need to realize that Sharpton is Jesse Jackson-style self-promoter. He has nothing to gain from saying "yeah, me too!" in the RP witch-hunt. Wait for a slow news day, and he'll do something like bitch at Hillary for not having enough left-handed black females on her campaign staff, and maybe call her husband a cracker.

-jcr

|1.13.08 @ 8:06PM|#

Folks, I'm shocked. Reason has gone a whole day without a blog post on the Ron Paul newsletters? What's going on here? They're not dropping the ball, are they? This dead horse needs to be daily flogged for at least another two weeks.

Umm, it's the weekend. The staffers are all busy buggering prostitutes and doing illegal drugs and freeing markets while wearing black leather jackets and sporting sideburns, or whatever the heck it is that cosmotarians do for fun in their time off. ;)

I'm sure we'll return to our regularly scheduled Paulomania/penance-for-biased-groveling-coverage come Monday. Oh, the humanity.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.13.08 @ 8:47PM|#

Prole, some comments upthread for you.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.13.08 @ 9:01PM|#

The Ron Paul Limo. Some folks have not thrown in the towel.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.13.08 @ 9:03PM|#

Nice, went to my House Blond's basketball games today, Dude! I thought it was hockey.

It's a 4th grade through 6th grade league but her team is all 4th graders. Scrappy LITTLE girls playing against 9th grade Amazons.

|1.13.08 @ 10:13PM|#

I get exposed to hip cultural stuff that I'm highly unlikely to run across in my square meatworld life.

I recognize that musical taste is subjective, so I have no problem with you liking Marillion even if I would rather dig my fingernails off my hand with a rusty fork than listen to them...but Marillion is about as far from hip as you can get. They aren't even hip in the "so bad their hip" kinda way.

Other prog that is not hip: Gentle Giant, Triumverat, Asia, or F.M.

Neu Mejican -- Hip is subjective. When you're subjected to Spongebob Squarepants and whatever ClearChannel Top40 dreck the kids select in the car while you're busy steering and trying to keep everyone alive, something like Marillion is a huge upgrade. I'm assuming your life is far more interesting than mine for you to 1) be familiar with their music and 2) be bored with it.

TWC -- Haven't bothered publishing anything in HawaiiReporter.com recently. Usually get something published in the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin every month or two (they limit you to one letter per month, though I'm about the only contributor who regularly pushes that envelope.)

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 10:32PM|#

prolefeed,

Hip is subjective.

Nah. Hip is objective. Here is an official hip certification page...

http://www.shilohshepherds.info/hipXrayCertification.htm

;^)

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 10:36PM|#

The most concise definition of "hip" I have seen... and totally objective.


1. hip
cool

My Dad is not hip.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=not+'hip'

The Wine Commonsewer|1.13.08 @ 10:40PM|#

Prole

That's cool that you know Dick Rowland. He's an interesting guy. I met him a couple of years ago (although Mrs TWC has known him for years).

He called her on the cell about something and when he found out we were in Maui he jumped on a plane from Oahu. We met him at Kahului Airport and spent several hours over beers and lunch at some little throw-back-to-the-fifties bar on the ground floor of an office building in town.

Next time you see him mention Lisa Snell and tell him we say hi! He won't know me as TWC, only as Mr Lisa.

The Wine Commonsewer|1.13.08 @ 10:40PM|#

NM, My dad isn't hip. But my kid's dad IS!

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 10:48PM|#

If marillion is the opposite of hip...

Try these guys
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wzK7ttlR0LQ

or these guys
http://youtube.com/watch?v=12aWPQyfL8c

Or these
http://youtube.com/watch?v=eQbqoQLCxQ0

Or these
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vXe48Yiyyyg

|1.13.08 @ 11:00PM|#

I've just stumbled across this. It appears that the heat is getting to Lew Rockwell, so he's sending his surrogates out to defend him. And, not surprisingly, the man who won't come clean about authoring the Ron Paul newsletters is (through his surrogates) demonstrating that he is ready to throw Paul under the bus:

"The burden of the newsletter content is on Ron Paul, the man whose name graces the covers, and shame on you scoundrel 'libertarians' for automatically drawing the assumption that Lew Rockwell must have, had to be, surely was involved in writing those passages that have you all so horrified. Yet you claim that this man, who has worked so hard - on his own time and dollar - to open peoples' minds to the more radical aspects of freedom and free markets, is 'destroying your movement,' as if this is some juvenile brotherhood of badges, pin pricks, sworn statements, and membership cards."

You can read the entire tiresome screed here:

http://www.karendecoster.com/blog/archives/002714.html

I stand by my original statements in another post that Rockwell is an "absolute, complete, total and utter piece of garbage," as well as a "scumbag."

By the way, did anyone else not know that Rockwell was accused some time ago of having an affair with Cindy Sheehan? Google it if you read about it. I thought good paleos weren't so morally lax, what with being "traditionalist Catholics" and all that.

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 11:00PM|#

The hippest thing from NM these days...

http://pitchforkmedia.imeem.com/video/Bw6lWSm_/beirut_elephant_gun_music_video/

And as a drummer, I find this pretty hip
http://pitchforkmedia.imeem.com/video/4AvcYyFI/77boadrum/

|1.13.08 @ 11:04PM|#

Cosmotarians, paleotarians, NFLtarians.... this whole thing is getting too complicated for me.

Neu Mejican|1.13.08 @ 11:04PM|#

TWC,

Hell, you are practically the definition of hip in my book.

Classically Liberal|1.13.08 @ 11:05PM|#

Here's another commentary:

http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2008/01/skunks-and-their-tactics.html

The people at the Mises Institute, who were closely tied to the Ron Paul newsletters that have so many people sick to their stomachs are stooping to a new low. These people have no shame.

Read on....

http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2008/01/skunks-and-their-tactics.html

The Wine Commonsewer|1.13.08 @ 11:53PM|#

Too hip, gotta go.

You da man, NM!

Truth is, the only hip I got is two hips that work.