2,4,6,8, With Whom Do We Associate?

From that Will Wilkinson post that Kerry Howley links:

Insofar as Ron Paul's racist newsletters propped up and encouraged racist norms, he has actually helped cultivate a cultural climate hostile to the prospects of "the blacks", whether or not he would end the drug war in the miraculous event of his presidency.

I would agree with this if the newsletters were Ron Paul's final contribution to the discourse or an end unto themselves. They were not. In large part they were a vehicle to raise money, build a national donor list, and make a Paul political comeback possible. And that's what they did. This is the toughest part of the story for me to deal with: if it wasn't for the Ron Paul Investment Letter and the Ron Paul Political Report, Paul wouldn't have raised so much money in 1996 and Greg Laughlin, a fairly typical southern Democrat-turned Republican, would be the congressman from Texas's 10th district.

What's the value been of having Ron Paul in Congress? I'm sure you could argue that policy papers and research and training from the Reason-Cato-IHS "Kochtopus" has done more to move libertarian ideas from the ether into practice than having a lone libertarian vote in the House. You could argue that Paul's career has been a net negative for libertarians, although I don't think Wilkinson is going there. Personally I like having Paul in the House, was thrilled when he entered the race (thinking he'd raise around $1 million and get a few votes in New Hampshire then pack it up), and am pleased that the next generations of libertarian-minded legislator—the John Campbells and Jeff Flakes—are pragmatic and removed from the old Rothbard mud-wrestling matches.

One thing, though. Neither of those guys, and none of the mainstream libertarain think tanks, have drawn more than 100,000 people to donate money or inspired thousands of people to camp out in snowy primary states, going door to door talking about libertarian ideas. Paul's done that, and he was able to do that, in part, because of hateful right-wing populist bigotry that grew his fundraising lists.

UPDATE: Fluffy, from the comments:

[T]he race war stuff in the newsletter was Rockwell's way of attempting to reach out to survivalists and militia members, who had overlapping issue affinity with a portion of libertarianism. How exactly would that "actually" worsen the cultural climate for minorities? Wouldn't the target for the material have already, you know, been racist?

I thought about this but it's awfully hard to prove. Maybe there were militiamen with Jesse Jackson dartboards who got the newsletters, found out about Hayek, and had "eureka" moments. Or maybe there were mainstream, Wilkinsonian libertarians who pored over this stuff about the "coming race war" and snagged copies of the Turner Diaries. We have no idea.

Comments

[an accomplishment]

Each year since his return to Congress, Dr Paul has been able to put a rider in appropriations bill stopping the HillaryCare national health ID number.

[Bingo]

*cries*

[gorak]

So Libertarianism has lost it's political virginity and finally has a black spot on it. So what, get over it.

[Milo]

Question about all this back and forth re: Paul and "the letters": Is there all of a sudden someone that Reason would RATHER see in the White House? If so, who?

[Marcvs]

Question about all this back and forth re: Paul and "the letters": Is there all of a sudden someone that Reason would RATHER see in the White House? If so, who?

Addressing a major issue with a candidate openly is not saying that you don't want him in office. It's called "intellectual honesty." Something non-libertarians often find confusing and strange.

[Fluffy]

As I understand it, the race war stuff in the newsletter was Rockwell's way of attempting to reach out to survivalists and militia members, who had overlapping issue affinity with a portion of libertarianism.

How exactly would that "actually" worsen the cultural climate for minorities? Wouldn't the target for the material have already, you know, been racist?

I'm not really actively supporting the Paul campaign any more, although I still talk about him online and will certainly vote for him. But some of the stuff being written on this controversy is just moronic. A couple of thousand militia guides reading a few throwaway paragraphs about muggers being fast runners has about as much impact on "the culture" as people at Hit N' Run reading my posts where I call Guy Montag a cunt: i.e. zero.

[Jerry]

I wonder how the Reason staff thinks about the 2005 use of the term racaille by then French interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy to describe the rioters in the Paris suburbs.

[Russ 2000]

Ron Paul could be the biggest asshole on the planet. As long as he votes "NO" most of the time and has the likelihood of vetoing nearly every piece of legislation that would come his way as POTUS, he'll get my vote. When I give a shit about sanctimony, I'll go join a church/social club.

[Bingo]

Jerry: I'm pretty sure the reason staff doesn't care because Sarkozy is not associated with the libertarian movement.

[Episiarch]

So I'm guessing Reason's ad revenue from hit counts is way way way the fuck up since this newsletter business occurred. Not that I have a problem with making money, but let's take a cooler, more rational look at why we have the endless, super-inflammatory Paul posts.

[Jim Lesczynski]

Addressing a major issue with a candidate openly is not saying that you don't want him in office. It's called "intellectual honesty." Something non-libertarians often find confusing and strange.

No, I think they went further than that. Most of the Reason staffers who have posted on this topic have implicitly or explicitly withdrawn their support for Ron Paul's candidacy. That's different than saying (as I do) that he made a serious mistake (or series of mistakes), but he's still the best available candidate.

[Kaganspawn]

Episiarch, if you are suggesting that Reason keeps dogging this story not because it is likely to be of interest to the readership but because it generates more clicks than yet another reality-based Keystone Kops story (keep them coming Mr. Balko, you do good), I cannot agree. If that were the case, the site would feature pictures of scantily clad women along the edges and ... oh, wait. Never mind.

[Tom Walls]

Amen, David. Whatever the tune of those paleo-penned missives way back when, the song that motivates da youts is one of basic optimism -- which is Ron's message.

David Kopel made my point in an op-ed on Ron a few months back, contrasting the dour message of Buchanan with the upbeat demeanor of the Paul campaign:

Like the Ronald Reagan message (and unlike the Pat Buchanan message), the Ron Paul message is fundamentally positive. There may be some anger about the depredations of huge and aggressive government, but the campaign's theme is "Hope for America" and its premise is that the American people are good people who can achieve the best for themselves, their families, their community, and their nation when the federal government gets out of the way and stops behaving like a helicopter mother.

Can you imagine the 'LOVE' message in one of Buchanan's campaigns?

[Ali]

Great and honest piece, Dave. Thank you.

Have people seen this: The Liberal's Ron Paul Problem?

[Jerry]

@Bingo
Libertarians can support Sarkozy, because he breaks with a French political tradition. Why should Paul be held to different standards?

[Michael Thompson]

It's ridiculous that you can even come up with a partial defense for the newsletters in this manner. The only people you are convincing of their worth are people who don't want them to mean what they do in the first place - actual libertarians who have every reason to support Paul, except for his apparent long-term endorsement of the bigotry that was written in his very own newsletters. Whether or not Paul's libertarian ideas are good for the nation (and they are) it is bad for libertarianism to be associated with this hateful crap. There is no excuse, and I doubt the person writing those letters was insincere and merely trying to up the donor list. They were not created by a non-racist who was merely exploiting racism, homophobia and extreme paranoia in order to generate more revenue for an important libertarian campaign - and even if they were, is that truly acceptable?

I'm gay, and I would still vote for Ron Paul in a heartbeat. Despite the fact that he for years did not decry the nastiness that was invoked in those newsletters - something that is telling, whether or not he or his supporters want to admit it - I know that the philosophy he believes in would not allow him to exploit homophobia or racism in order to create unjust laws. He may be a bad person in private, but I know he espouses good principles in practice.

Still, there is NO excuse for the content of those newsletters, there is no excuse for him letting them run under his banner for years, and there is no excuse for his supporters excusing it. They are nasty, and there is something quite nasty about him for letting them exist unchallenged.

[SIV]

mainstream, Wilkinsonian libertarians

[SIV]

the rest of it.....

mainstream, Wilkinsonian libertarians

Mainstream Dondero libertarians.....

Give me the kooks anyday, even the blue guy is better than these fuckheads

Weigel, I might of missed something in the ongoing libertarian kerfuffle but from what I've read you are a real stand-up guy for a
Democrat shill.

[John]

Interesting insights, David. I'm finding myself in fluffy's camp

[Dodsworth]

Let's face the fact that Ron Paul has money to spend and he's going to spend it and act accordingly.

He isn't going to drop out. Thus, since he is already identified with libertarianism, he should be encouraged to spending the money in ways that most promote liberty: promoting civil liberties, fighting the racist drug war, and opposing the war. If he does this, he can do a lot of good.

People who are making with the purple prose about the sordid nature of the newsletters should emphasize these and other constructive ways for the Paul campaign to turn a negative situation into a positive one for libertarianism instead of wasting time a futile effort to get Paul to withdraw.

[joshua corning]

Is "Kochtopus" code for "Jew"?

[Michael Thompson]

And one more thing... Ron Paul supporters need to stop acting like this shouldn't be talked about. You are starting to sound like the types of people who support Hillary Clinton. Should we just ignore the bad aspects of a candidate because we support a greater cause?

That just makes us sheep.

[Dave Gebhardt]

I agree with Jim Lesczynski. I have been a Reason subscriber for almost 10 years and a Cato supporter. I had no idea who Lew Rockwell was prior to the Paul campaign, and my beliefs align with Reason/Cato but I am appalled with both. Let me get this straight, Boaz, et al are afraid of being associated with someone who is associated with a racist? Cowardice, pure and simple.

My faith in Reason and Cato I fear has been permanently damaged. I am not sure that Rockwell has the answers either. I honestly don't know what to do...

[Click \'n\' Learn]

While some aspects of libertarianism aren't that bad, considered as a complete ideology it's pretty darn far out there. I hesitate to say "inhumane", but, well I guess I just did.

I don't think too many of RP's supporters are full-on libertarians or understand everything that it involves and implies. Otherwise, many of them would run away in horror.

I'll bet if you reviewed the popular comment threads at YT, Digg, etc. you wouldn't find too many people discussing Hayek. Instead, they'd be concentrating on selling anti-CFR, anti-NAFTASuperhighway (the one that Reason tells us doesn't exist despite a map showing it at a Canadian government site), and "freedom" (i.e., free drugs).

[hale]

People who are making with the purple prose about the sordid nature of the newsletters should emphasize these and other constructive ways for the Paul campaign to turn a negative situation into a positive one for libertarianism instead of wasting time a futile effort to get Paul to withdraw.

Okay, I'm game. If Paul wants to stay in the race, he should engage in some proactive spin: first off, he should take responsibility for the newsletter, explain why he was associated with those opinions in the past and for the love of God, have someone write him a decent speech explaining why his politics are antithetical to those attitudes today.

[Rick Barton]

David:

I would agree with this if the newsletters were Ron Paul's final contribution to the discourse or an end unto themselves. They were not.

"Final contribution"? What?? The evidence is that he didn't even write em. Among that evidence is that they don't even sound like Dr Paul. He speaks and writes in a more up-scale manner. (Not that there's anything wrong with other modes of verba;y expressing one's self, of course)

Here's what someone who's known Dr Paul for 20 years has to say germane to this matter:

"Austin TX NAACP President Nelson Linde, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist..."

http://tinyurl.com/28g7p9

[jp]

So to 'raise money', Paul had to write about Wild conspiracies and play to the politics of fear and paranoia. As well as Racist and other bigoted things?

and today we see the guy go regularly on Alex Jones radio show, talk about the "Trilateral COmmission" and the "New York Bankers"....while openly endorsing the North American Union and repeating the Moveon.org War Propaganda?

[jp]

Paul admitted to writing them in 1996, as this blog has already pointed out! They also have personal details of his personal life in them, look in paragraph below calling MLK a Gay Pedophile for one instance.

[Ali]

jp- Are you Eric Dondero? No, can't be, this is not Eric's writing style.

[crimethink]

They also have personal details of his personal life in them, look in paragraph below calling MLK a Gay Pedophile for one instance.

Are you saying that Ron Paul was molested by Martin Luther King?

[Fluffy]

Actually, Click N' Learn, I would say that the people supporting Paul because they're afraid of the NAFTA superhighway are much more likely to be racists than the people supporting Paul because they're libertarians.

If anyone should be "horrified when they learn the truth", it should be libertarians when they discover that people supporting Paul for that stuff do so because they hate Mexicans.

I personally think "Mexicans Out!" and "Build A Wall to Protect Us from the Brown Peril" is much more of a racist sentiment than anything in textbook libertarianism.

[crimethink]

Damn you, Weigal! I have work to do today, and now you're forcing me to hang out in the comments section of your blog post! You're just as bad as Ron Bailey with his constant embryonic stem cell posts back in the day.

[Pig Mannix]

My faith in Reason and Cato I fear has been permanently damaged. I am not sure that Rockwell has the answers either. I honestly don't know what to do...

I wouldn't worry about it. Most of the people I know who self-identify as libertarians wouldn't recognize either Lew Rockwell or Nick Gillespie if they dropped dead in front of them.

I suspect that's probably true of most Paul supporters as well. They simply heard what he had to say, and liked what they heard. I doubt they much give a shit as to whether he's a "pure" libertarian.

[Christopher Monnier]

> I personally think "Mexicans Out!" and "Build A Wall to Protect Us from the Brown Peril" is much more of a racist sentiment than anything in textbook libertarianism.

Obviously. Nothing about textbook libertarianism is racist.

[Rick Barton]

Paul admitted to writing them in 1996,

Cite proof, please.

They also have personal details of his personal life in them,

Ghost writers do that.

[grumpy realist]

OK, you take your typical idealistic college student, who has tons of gay friends, maybe likes smoking pot, has just finished reading some Ayn Rand, and he's been supporting Ron Paul because all his friends do and gee, some of his ideas sorta sound neat. "Oh, so that's what a libertarian is! Cool!"

And then you run into evidence showing that Ron Paul seems to be perfectly chummy with conspiracy nuts, race war fanatics, and is very closely tied to a group that supports White Identity nitwits, slavery apologists, and neo-Nazis.

You think they're going to hang around self-proclaimed "libertarians" after this? Riiiight....I think we'll see a lot of people backing away slowly.

[Jerry]

@jp
So some editor copying a christmas wish of Paul into the newsletter is proving what exactly?

[jp]

alot of the Neo-Nazi's that support him do so not just because of his racist past and NAU conspiratorial stuff with "Mexicans"....its also the Foreign Policy. They hate Israel, Paul would go along way to destroying it among other things. The major media didn't report it but Cindy Sheehan had Neo-Nazi's marching with her in Crawford during that stunt. Probalby for the same reason they have been giving Paul a pass now.

the alignment of White Supremacist and Islamist has a long history, going back to Hitler atleast and the Grand Mufti of Jeruslem. Jayna Davis reported on the "Third Terrorist" in the Ok. City bombings that the Govt. never identified and closed the case on as being an Iraqi that McVeigh met in the first Gulf War. Interesting book, something we'll never know the truth on, if there is any truth, until decades from now. Much like the way Sen. McCarthy was exonerated when the Venona Decrypts were declassified in the early 90's.

[crimethink]

Rick Barton,

Matt Welch did a blog post about Dr Paul's 1996 comments a few days ago. I'm too lazy to find a link, but at that time he basically said the quotes were being taken out of context.

[thoreau]

Here's my attempt to merge threads and get 500 posts:

The racism in those newsletters show fascist tendencies. Because fascism is inherently a phenomenon of the left, it therefore follows that Ron Paul is a leftist, his free market rhetoric notwithstanding. In this regard he is like Milton Friedman, who showed himself to be a creature of the left by associating with Pinochet.

And if you still haven't been baited into commenting, let me say one more thing:

GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL AND BAD FOR TEH CHILDREN!

[Paul]

He may be a bad person in private, but I know he espouses good principles in practice.

I remember something from the sixties... what was it... the personal is the political or some such thing.

[thoreau]

Oh, and if anybody thinks that my previous comment is serious, then I think you should be allowed to take remedies for humor impairment, even if the FDA hasn't approved them.

[crimethink]

alot of the Neo-Nazi's that support him do so not just because of his racist past and NAU conspiratorial stuff with "Mexicans"....its also the Foreign Policy.

I get it! If you don't support killing brown people, you're a racist.

[Egosumabbas]

I suspect that's probably true of most Paul supporters as well. They simply heard what he had to say, and liked what they heard. I doubt they much give a shit as to whether he's a "pure" libertarian.

Whoops! the LP looks like it has a lot of purging to do for the next generation. Can't have the LP getting more than 0.5% of the vote now, can we?

[Devils Advocate]

Whatever kind of extra curricular activities RP has done I could really give a shit. What's my agenda, screw godverments, all of them, and political parties. They have been mans downfall from day one. No mistype there.

The following are excerpts of writings from L. Ray Smith's web site http://www.bibletruths.com/ that I frequent which are philosophically as close to truth regarding religion/government as I understand them to be. Yes religion too.

"Again, the DEVIL takes Him up into an exceeding high mountain, and shows Him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; and says to Him, All these things will I give You, if You will fall down and worship me" (Matt. 4:8-9).

Let's notice a few things overlooked by most Sunday school teachers (and most of the world's greatest theologians as well). Ready? Are you sure? Okay, here goes: ALL THE NATIONS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD BELONG TO SATAN THE DEVIL!!! Heaven and Earth are God's possessions, however, God has delegated the nations to Satan. Satan could not offer all these kingdoms of the world to Jesus if he did not possess them to offer them in the first place.

[jp]

as reported by THIS BLOG:

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124339.html

Paul admitted back in 1996 to writing the "RON PAUL Political Report". He is currently contradicting himself and if the media weren't giving him a pass, he'd be on the fast lane to retirement.

And its not just the Portion about his Wife and grandchildren, there are several other portions that have personal details.

that said, I don't doubt at all that Lew Rockwell also wrote portions of them and that Paul knew exactly what he was writing over decade long period.

[crimethink]

thoreau,

You forgot to tie in abortion, stem cell research, and TEH GAY. Has the weed of the halflings clearly dulled your mind?

[KipEsquire]

What's the value been of having Ron Paul in Congress?

Precisely. What exactly has "Dr. No" really achieved as a (not quite) "libertarian politician"? In twenty years in Congress, has Paul ever won over a single colleague to his cause? Does he ever try, for example, to discuss his views on banking (let alone homosexuality) with Barney Frank over lunch? Does he initiate calm, quiet dialogues about farm subsidies with Collin Peterson or Dave Obey? Does he even know who Jeff Flake is? Or does he just sign in, vote "no" on some spending bills, sponsor some anti-gay bigotry measures, secure some "libertarian earmarks" for his (favored) constituents, and call it a day -- all the while patting himself on the back for his "commitment to principles"?

[crimethink]

Devils Advocate,

You don't seem to have considered the possibility that the Father of Lies was lying.

[Paul]

And the drug war and legalized weed... and stuff.

[Rick Barton]

jp

alot of the Neo-Nazi's that support him do so not just because of his racist past

What racist past? You didn't cite a source for your previous bullshit.

Paul would go along way to destroying it (Israel) among other things.

Oh right. If our government quit giving our money to the Israeli government and other mid-East states as Dr paul advocates, Israel would just implode!

[Bill Woolsey]

Did Paul need the racist remarks to raise the money in 1996?

If the racist remarks had been left off, how much would have been lost? How much would he have raised if he just stuck with nonracist apocalyptic, conspiratorial goldbuggery?

I am not persuaded that this was about building a donor list for Paul's comeback in 1996.

Some people wanted Paul to run for President in 1992, and instead, they went with Buchanan.

I think this was about Rothbard's strategy of rebuilding the "Old Right." There was going to be a mass movement of blue collar, somewhat homophobic, semi-racists who would fight the federal government. It never happened.

Just like Rothbard imagined in 1969 that the New Left was going to overthrow the Federal government and that the libertarians should be on the revolutionary side of the baracades, it was one of those crazy fantasies.

The racist newsletters are an artifact from a strategy that failed.

I think it is entirely possible that everyone involved saw it as propaganda. But not just for a fundraising list. To build a mass movement.

Contrary to what many have said, I think it is entirely possible that Paul didn't read "his" newsletter.

[Devils Advocate]

crimethink,

As we are all guilty of. In his day Galileo was declared a heretic by the chief priests and scribes. With the threat of being racked and gutted he himself denounced his discovery that the world was round. To condemn another out of fear, you condemn yourselves.

[dodsworth]

Hale:

Fine, he should explain more fully. More to the point and more helpful for libertarianism, however, his ad campaign should confidentally go the offensive in pushing an end to the drug war, pardons of offenders, pushing civil liberties and the Bill of Rights (not just "the Constitution") and attacking the Iraq War. If he does this, and does it agressively, the newsletter issue will be more or less forgotten.

[Egosumabbas]

"Again, the DEVIL takes Him up into an exceeding high mountain, and shows Him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; and says to Him, All these things will I give You, if You will fall down and worship me" (Matt. 4:8-9).

Let's notice a few things overlooked by most Sunday school teachers (and most of the world's greatest theologians as well). Ready? Are you sure? Okay, here goes: ALL THE NATIONS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD BELONG TO SATAN THE DEVIL!!!

Amen brother! Even the Good Book has libertarianism in it.

What exactly has "Dr. No" really achieved as a (not quite) "libertarian politician"? In twenty years in Congress, has Paul ever won over a single colleague to his cause?

Uhhhhh, ever heard of the RLC? Also, a shitton of folks are considering going into office on a libertarian plank, using the republican party or the democratic party as a jumping board. Hell, the LP may even get some more YOUNG due-paying members now.

[highnumber]

Is "Kochtopus" code for "Jew"?

No, I think it's code for "cosmopolibertarian."

[jp]

"What racist past? You didn't cite a source for your previous bullshit."

the racist, homophobic and Conspiratorial newsletters in the "RON PAUL political Report" that went out for over a decade and that when questioned in 1996 he admitted to writing. WHich claiming he didn't write and didn't know the content of them for well over a decade is beyond beleif anyway. especially from something he profited from.

politics of fear and paranoia and For Profit.

[crimethink]

I thought The D O N D E R O founded the RLC in his living room (in between thrusts with Mexican whores, probably).

[crimethink]

jp,

The racist and homophobic stuff was limited to 1990-1994. Trying to lump in the mildly kookish --but not bigoted-- stuff that spanned a longer period is intellectually dishonest.

[Bored with this already]

Can there possibly be anything left to say about this topic that hasn't already been said?

Perhaps someone can just scream hysterically like Reverand Lovejoy's wife in The Simpsons,
"Won't someone please think of the children" and then we can all forget about it.

[Rick Barton]

JP,

Where in the link you cite does Ron Paul admit to authoring the offensive passages in the newsletters?

[joshua corning]

Instead, they'd be concentrating on selling anti-CFR, anti-NAFTASuperhighway

I wonder if i can get a t-shirt that says "Privatize the NAFTASuperhighway"?

[crimethink]

Bored,

I believe you have the positive liberty of being able to skip over topics you're not interested in, like I do with comic strip and prog rock posts.

[jp]

and recently taking donations from Neo-Nazi's, a group universally considered Evil, being called on it by the media then refusing to dissaciate himself from those donations. Combined with budding up with Alex "The Jews did 9/11" Jones on his radio show.

of course there is Bill White's claim that was brought up last month and the pics with Neo-Nazi's....there is alot here to just keep ignoring.

Check out Alex Jones trailer for 'Endgame'
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pkgGOFXuYPw

certifiable Crackpots.

[crimethink]

joshua corning,

Are you crazy? We don't want the evil corporations taking over our continent's precious superhighway!

[anon]

"Paul's done that, and he was able to do that, in part, because of hateful right-wing populist bigotry that grew his fundraising lists."

That's some poor drafting. I'm certain you mean to still be speaking of the 96 race but the sloppy writing now makes it look like you are suggesting that Paul's fundraising success in this presidential campaign was in some material way due to these newsletters. That defies any rational look at the evidence.

Probably inadvertent on your part, but I'd fix that phrasing.

[dhex]

ALL THE NATIONS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD BELONG TO SATAN THE DEVIL!!!

sounds about right to me.

oh.

oh, it's a baaaaaaaad thing.

sorry.

Can there possibly be anything left to say about this topic that hasn't already been said?

yes.

is "cosmopolitan libertarian urban jew" code for "jew jew jew jew jew"?

[crimethink]

jp,

He disassociated himself from those people, if not the money itself. He has a good point in saying that he'd rather use the money for promoting liberty via his campaign rather than give it back to Black to use in spreading hate.

And I'll take being associated with crackpot Alex Jones over crackpot Sean Hannity any day of the week, sir.

[Mike]

I am a gay man and the fact that he supports the Constitutional right of White Supremists to voice their opinion lets me know that he will support MY Freedom of Speech as a Gay American as well.

The newsletters actually make me support Dr Paul MORE, not less. He will support the Freedom of Speech of blacks, hispanics, asians, jews, christians, hindus, muslims, gays, straights, transgendered, tall, short, fat, skinny, old, young, republican, democrat, libertarian, ALL AMERICANS.

He stands up for his principles and the principles of the Constitution and I stand up for him. I will continue in my work as a Precinct Captain for Dr Paul and spread his message of truth, equality, and freedom for all Americans.

[jp]

Here is just a couple places in Matt Welch blog:

Oct. 11, 1996, Houston Chronicle:

"Paul, who earlier this week said he still wrote the newsletter for subscribers, was unavailable for comment Thursday. "

May 22, 1996 Dallas Morning News:

"Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation. [?]"

-----------

now he is stating he never wrote the newsletters and not only that did not know the content of what was going out under his name for over a decade and that he was profiting from!

then factor in the several sections that have personal details included.

[SIV]

There was going to be a mass movement of blue collar, somewhat homophobic, semi-racists who would fight the federal government. It never happened.

Something like that was happening in the early 70s.Arthur Bremer stopped it with a bullet.

[crimethink]

ALL THE NATIONS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD BELONG TO SATAN THE DEVIL!!!

That brings up a good question, though: do libertarians support the Prince of Darkness' right to private property? Or are pure spirits just as ineligible for holding property as nonhuman animals?

[joe]

I don't ever want to see any more criticism of Democrats for associating with FORMER racists, ever again.

[crimethink]

joe,

Not until you agree not to criticize us for associating with RP. And you can't do it under a bogus alias like "Banned in Boston" either.

[Mr. X]

For the record, Dr. Paul first denied writing the newsletters in a 2001 interview with Texas Monthly. To say that he claimed authorship in 1996 and just denied it during this campaign is dishonest and wrong.

[thoreau]

do libertarians support the Prince of Darkness' right to private property? Or are pure spirits just as ineligible for holding property as nonhuman animals?

Well, your mention of animals reminds me that the Prince of Darkness is often portrayed as having the head of a goat. I guess the responses would depend in part on whether the libertarian answering is also a Furry.

Ferrets might also factor into this.

Of course, if Satan rules over Hell, then his monopoly on the use of force in hell technically qualifies him as a government.

[Bingo]

I do, I want to see more criticism of Dems associating with former racists.

More pls.

[crimethink]

Of course, if Satan rules over Hell, then his monopoly on the use of force in hell technically qualifies him as a government.

I thought Adam and Eve created Hell with their original sin. That would make all of us co-owners, with Satan just a permanent manager of sorts.

[shecky]

I can't wait until this whole goofy episode makes it's way into the next revision of Doherty's book.

[Pig Mannix]

Here is just a couple places in Matt Welch blog:

Oct. 11, 1996, Houston Chronicle:

"Paul, who earlier this week said he still wrote the newsletter for subscribers, was unavailable for comment Thursday. "

May 22, 1996 Dallas Morning News:

"Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation. [?]"

I don't care if they find bodies in his crawl space. At this point, I supporting him merely out of malice and spite.

He may not keep the greatest of friends, but damn!, he's sure making all of the right enemies!

[thoreau]

I thought Adam and Eve created Hell with their original sin. That would make all of us co-owners, with Satan just a permanent manager of sorts.

Ah, in that case the real problem isn't our continued sin, but rather our refusal to reform employment law so that we, as the owners, can fire Satan.

Damn demon unions!

[joshua corning]

Of course, if Satan rules over Hell, then his monopoly on the use of force in hell technically qualifies him as a government.

So wait...as libertarians we would not support Satan owning property except in very limited instances.

[SIV]

Off-topic but what the hell:

I do, I want to see more criticism of Dems associating with former racists.

More pls.

"The American political system produced this remarkable man, and my state did, and I'm real proud of it."

Hillary Clinton's chief campaign spokesman William Jefferson Clinton on notorious staunch segregationist J. William Fulbright.

Is it any wonder they reach for the "race card" in smearing Barack Obama?

[Ali]

fire Satan?

[Jerry]

@jp
That was during the 1996 campaign. It might have been politically difficult to explain at that point that Paul was actually not the editor of the newsletter.

[thoreau]

Ali-

Well, we'd have to give him a severance package. He can feast on the souls of some politicians or something, but he can no longer fill our minds with wicked thoughts.

However, as long as we're on the subject, what about when Jesus expelled the money changers from the Temple? I know that Jesus was a duly authorized representatives of His Father, but if His Father had signed a rental contract for them to use space in His house, then how can Jesus break that contract?

[Paul]

then how can Jesus break that contract?

Divine Eminent Domain.

[joshua corning]

is "cosmopolitan libertarian urban jew" code for "jew jew jew jew jew"?

No...it is code for "jew libertarian jew international banker"

I don't know where you got the extra "jew".

Is """ code for "jew"?

[jp]

some of them have Paul's name at the bottom and listed as THE EDITOR

don't be naive, of course he's behind these things. If you were personally profiting from a political newsletter for over a DECADE and they had your NAME attached at the top and SOLITITATION LETTERS went out with your letterhead and Signature....Do ya Think, just maybe, he was knee deep in it? paticularly with all the other evidence.

and the point is Paul is given a pass by the media, big time. With his past statements saying he WROTE them which contradict today, paticularly given the content. If he wasn't repeating Moveon.org talking points he'd be history long ago.

[some dude]

One word: Sanctimony.

[SIV]

And I'll take being associated with crackpot Alex Jones over crackpot Sean Hannity any day of the week, sir.

Crimethink:

Kinda tough choice there but, if forced at the point of a gun to chose, I'd rather be associated with Hannity.

Ron Paul is associated with both of 'em.

[crimethink]

If he wasn't repeating Moveon.org talking points he'd be history long ago.

Thanks for revealing your reasons for attacking Dr Paul. I guess anyone who wants to stop killing brown people must be a racist.

[joe]

crimethink,

I've never criticized you fring lunatics for associating with Ron Paul. As a matter of fact, I've written very nice things about the man. I don't get the "Banned in Boston" reference, and the only time I ever posted under another name to hide my identity, it was on a drug thread.

[Nolan]

I'm sorry, this is OT, but how do we let the H&R writers know about a news story we have found, and deemed worthy of H&R?

I've emailed the news story to [e-mail].
However, I'm not entirely sure this is the best place to give them a heads up. Would it be better to contact one of the regular contributors directly by email?

btw, here's the story if interested, reason writers.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Huckabee_Amend_Constitution_to_meet_Gods_0115.html

[crimethink]

SIV,

Ron Paul is associated with Sean Hannity the same way that Stephen Colbert is associated with George Bush -- he had to appear with him to get some screen time, and their relationship is a hostile one.

And, given the fact that Dr Paul dissed Hannity after the last debate by not showing up for a 1-on-1 with him, it would seem he's broken that association.

[Ali]

Thoreou,

I would think the last place Satan would like would be Heaven. Can't we fire him by sending him to heaven? But then wouldn't all the bad people end up in heaven as a way of punishing them? But, you see that is the thing, is it safe to assume that you and I are good people? You haven't done anything bad, now, have you? So we wouldn't end up in Hell, right? Hence, we can't fire Satan. Those who end up in Hell love Satan and would rather keep him. See I always new those statists would have to end up in Hell!! Not only that, they will love Satan so much that they will not want to overthrow him and send him in heaven. QED.

[crimethink\'s alias]

I don't get the "Banned in Boston" reference, and the only time I ever posted under another name to hide my identity, it was on a drug thread.

That's exactly what I would say if I were posting under aliases.

[Ali]

It all makes sense now.

[Devils Advocate]

Thoreau

However, as long as we're on the subject, what about when Jesus expelled the money changers from the Temple? I know that Jesus was a duly authorized representatives of His Father, but if His Father had signed a rental contract for them to use space in His house, then how can Jesus break that contract?

Miner clarification. The contract was broke by the residents of the house. For your viewing pleasure http://bible-truths.com/lake10.html

[crimethink]

If politics ends at the water's edge, it certainly ends at the gates of Hell too.

[Satan]

Ah, in that case the real problem isn't our continued sin, but rather our refusal to reform employment law so that we, as the owners, can fire Satan.

I have a no cut/no trade clause in my managerial contract. I'm running Hell until 16,497 AD.

[Paul]

Miner clarification. The contract was broke by the [...]

These look for gold, those look for silver.

[jp]

"Thanks for revealing your reasons for attacking Dr Paul. I guess anyone who wants to stop killing brown people must be a racist."

huh?

[joe]

OK, crimethink, whatever.

This is good for you, because there's no way for me to prove a negative.

Congratulations, you've finally figured out a way to start an argument with me and not get beaten.

I post under my own name, with my own email address, and have been doing so for about six and a half years. Believe me, don't believe me.

Whatever.

[TGGP]

I'm sure you could argue that policy papers and research and training from the Reason-Cato-IHS "Kochtopus" has done more to move libertarian ideas from the ether into practice than having a lone libertarian vote in the House.
Have they actually accomplished anything? I believe that there have been multiple times where there was one deciding vote in the House during Paul's tenure, but I don't know if I can lay anything at the feet of the aforementioned institutions. I remember reading Brian's "freewheeling" history of the libertarian movement where his boasts of its victories largely consisted of the number of jobs for "professional libertarians" and the proposed reform of Social Security which was dead on arrival and was still questionable as a marginal improvement.

[Mr. Blather]

--Neither of those guys, and none of the mainstream libertarain think tanks, have drawn more than 100,000 people to donate money or inspired thousands of people to camp out in snowy primary states, going door to door talking about libertarian ideas. Paul's done that, and he was able to do that, in part, because of hateful right-wing populist bigotry that grew his fundraising lists.--

Ummm, this is just wrong. Paul's fundraising has had almost NOTHING to do with his fundraising lists. I personally donated based solely on his opposition to the war and quixotic desire to return us to some semblance of constitutional law. I'd never received even an email from the Paul Campaign before that.

It's been interesting to watch this election from Japan. The Democrats/liberals express support for Ron Paul's opposition to the war, but in the end they'd rather watch thousands of people die than give up a single handout. They don't seem to realize that a Democratic president would escalate the war and then use it as an excuse to stop even more handouts. (I'd love to give you universal healthcare, but we have to end this endless war first...)

Reason, CATO et al, who finally outed themselves as nominal libertarians at best, would rather watch people die in Iraq than appear to support beliefs they consider to be out of the mainstream. The worst hit jobs I've seen on Ron Paul over these newsletters have all come from so-called libertarian sites.

The Republicans long ago (7 years-ish) became Democrats and chose to start nation building wars, increase the size and invasiveness of government and drive the country bankrupt by dropping the notion of "pay as you go" and leaving out the "tax" part of "tax and spend".

But, hey, Ron Paul wrote, or didn't write but supported some occasionally racist newsletters a decade or so ago. Let's get rid of him and send even more Mexican- and African-Americans off to war to die. That's not racist at all.

[...(Sigh)]

way to try and cover your own back, Weisel. perhaps you can link to Tom Palmer's blog, in the spirit of fairness and balance..

KipEsquire: funny stuff, keep it up. i'm joking, of course.

[LevStrauss]

The question of support is irrelevant. First and foremost somebody has to come out and say who wrote those newsletters. There has been a few rumors and it seems some people are inferring that it is right, that Lew wrote the majority of those letters and that Ron is lying to protect a business associate, an adviser, and a friend. If they are friends to the movement, revolution, or whatever you want to call it, they will provide full disclosure.

Are you willing to look like a damn fool when something else comes out, probably worse, on the day of the money bomb. How can you trust Ron, he hasn't been very forthcoming? I've seen him explain policy, I know he is capable. MLK Day? That will open a bigger can of worms. That could get really ugly. For Zeus's sake, they originally leaked the story to coincide with the New Hampshire Primary. Anybody, Ron, Lew, Reason, has to come out and tell us who wrote what and give us a detailed explanation of how this newsletter operated and what else is out there.

[James Kabala]

"As we are all guilty of. In his day Galileo was declared a heretic by the chief priests and scribes. With the threat of being racked and gutted he himself denounced his discovery that the world was round. To condemn another out of fear, you condemn yourselves."

Everyone in Galileo's time (and for several hundred years before that) knew that the world was round. Galileo was on trial for a related but very different issue, whether the Earth revolved around the Sun. He was, of course, correct, but he actually went beyond the scientific evidence of his time, which was more inconclusive.

[Pig Mannix]

Ha! I guess Paul is still gaining supporters! Richard Viguerie has launched a web site on his behalf!

If that doesn't get the hankies a-wavin' around here, I don't know what will!

UltimateRonPaul.com

[joe]

Let's get rid of him and send even more Mexican- and African-Americans off to war to die. That's not racist at all.

I see this argument being made a lot. And Paul's promises to end the drug war, too.

I didn't realize "disparate impact" theory was so popular among right-libertarians.

[Ed]

fuck you reason. how can you try and assassinate the best chance at spreading our libertarian views. Racists are collectivists, to say because Ron Paul had a racist work on his newsletter invalidates everything he has actually said and done on race issues is a collectivist view and an argument built on logical fallacies. Ron Pauls newlsetter is the product of more than one person to say that what one person wrote in the newsletter invalidates it is bullshit. WE know Ron Paul isn't a racist because if you look at what he has said and how he has voted in the past proves to us Ron Paul the individual is not a racist. I am not a racist but I have had friends who were, but to say I'm a racist because I associated with such fools is no argument against how I myself act as a person. No one is perfect and some people are just really stupid, I think Ron is foolish for being a christian but it isn't relevant. I'm voting because Ron Paul votes the way he says he will and that is almost unanimously pro liberty always. So fuck the traffic baiting and fuck the holier than thou bullshit. We know he isn't a racist and we know I'm probably some stoned or drunk person who can't write a comment.

[Devils Advocate]

James Kabala,

Correction noted. The point remains valid.

To condemn another out of fear, you condemn yourselves.

[Not Here To Help]

Among that evidence is that they don't even sound like Dr Paul.

They don't sound like Lew Rockwell, either. But the purpose of a witch hunt is to invent a witch.

It's obvious whose writings the condemned passages do strongly resemble, but there's no profit in outing him, as he's already roundly dismissed for reasons that render this flap redundant. So it won't happen.

Paul and Rockwell won't give him up, probably as a matter of personal honor, and the Reason-led pile-on is only about disowning libertarianism's image among leftists as an ideology of white male rurality, and distancing themselves from those who don't give a fuck what leftists think of us, not about finding out what actually happened.

[Paul]

To condemn another out of fear, you condemn yourselves.

I fear Hillary Clinton...does that count?

[matt]

It's obvious whose writings the condemned passages do strongly resemble, but there's no profit in outing him, as he's already roundly dismissed for reasons that render this flap redundant. So it won't happen.

Are you talking about Eric Dondero or Gary North?

Because the latter has a writing/grammar style totally different from the one utilized in the newsletters.

What's more, Gary has been writing and selling his own newsletters for ages. It doesn't make sense for him to do someone else's and make them different from his while still doing his own, does it?

[Daze]

How exactly would that "actually" worsen the cultural climate for minorities? Wouldn't the target for the material have already, you know, been racist?

Can we assume every subscriber was a racist before subscribing? Some people probably knew Paul as a prominent libertarian, signed up because they were interested in libertarianism.

If, as some Paul groupies insist, Paul himself had no knowledge of the racist content in his eponymous newsletter, why should we assume that every subscriber had that knowledge before subscribing?

[Devils Advocate]

Paul,

No man/woman has divine power. Fear is a state of mind used to subvert mankind. After all, there is only one to fear.

[Mr. Green Genes]

If you squint just right, some Reasonoids look to be playing the part of the Shiites from Islam's Shiite/Sunni split.

[cosmoprozackian]

what about when Jesus expelled the money changers from the Temple?

Jesus was an anti-Semite neo-Nazi. After all, you can't expect someone who rants about "money changers" to be very cosmopolitan!

[gaijin]

This navel-gazing cr@p is wearing incredibly thin.

[Sulla]

Apropos of nothing, if you click on the link, you'll see another take on the issue, with Something Awful's Ron Paul Political Report: Kidz Page. I apologize if this has already been noted elsewhere, but it looks like it just came out.

[Sulla]

I mean, of course, click on my name in the post above, for the link therein (so to speak).

[Daze]

the Reason-led pile-on is only about disowning libertarianism's image among leftists as an ideology of white male rurality, and distancing themselves from those who don't give a fuck what leftists think of us, not about finding out what actually happened

I see the "pile-on" as an honest debate over political principles. For some of us, promoting bigotry and race war runs counter to basic libertarian principles and warrants strong rebuttal, regardless how it affects the short-term interests of one politician's campaign.

Thought experiment: If some politican developed a new spinoff ideology called "stalinolibertarianism" and ran for president, would we have this chorus of "don't criticize a fellow libertarian, don't air dirty laundry, he says he didn't write all that stuff about reeducating class enemies in concentration camps anyway"? Or would we want open debate about where libertarians should stand on the concentration camp issue? That's how some of us feel about the race war and culture war rhetoric in those Ron Paul newsletters.

[reading is fundamental]

Gary North The newsletter wasn't promoting race war, it was predicting one, and condemning those who were promoting one.

[Q]

Reason has to be PC and throw Paul under the bus because they put his face on the cover of the mag. Any newcomer to the website will see that picture and wonder if Reason supports this "racist" man. Then they'll look at some of the H&R posts and be like "oh, even THEY don't like him."

[Eric Dondero]

You won't believe the very latest. DailyKos uncovered a list of Michigan Ron Paul campaign coordinators. On the list as Midland Campaign Chairman is the local KKK Grand Wizard.

[rittberg]

KKK? He's probably a racist nutjob who wants to kill all the a-rabs

[Nigel Watt]

You know what? Fuck you, Kochtopus.

[Derek]

Eric, you won't believe the latest: you're a loser who needs to get a life and get over the fact that Ron Paul has made more of himself than you'll ever become.

[Robert]

What's the value been of having Ron Paul in Congress? I'm sure you could argue that policy papers and research and training from the Reason-Cato-IHS "Kochtopus" has done more to move libertarian ideas from the ether into practice than having a lone libertarian vote in the House. ...am pleased that the next generations of libertarian-minded legislator-the John Campbells and Jeff Flakes-are pragmatic and removed from the old Rothbard mud-wrestling matches.
I've been saying that for years. Ron Paul's a great guy and all, but casting 1 alienated vote in the House just doesn't do much per se. I don't know how much of the ample and generous following he's had for decades owes to his having been elected, but I suspect that had he spent fewer terms in Congress and more terms practicing obs-gyn and coin dealing, his following would've been just as strong and as influential or maybe more so. Meanwhile Jeff Flake in recent times and good ol' "Individual Man" from Calif. (name I keep forgetting) show how to have more influence in Congress while eschewing the Dr. No role.

[Robert]

What's the value been of having Ron Paul in Congress? I'm sure you could argue that policy papers and research and training from the Reason-Cato-IHS "Kochtopus" has done more to move libertarian ideas from the ether into practice than having a lone libertarian vote in the House. You could argue that Paul's career has been a net negative for libertarians, although I don't think Wilkinson is going there. Personally I like having Paul in the House, was thrilled when he entered the race (thinking he'd raise around $1 million and get a few votes in New Hampshire then pack it up), and am pleased that the next generations of libertarian-minded legislator-the John Campbells and Jeff Flakes-are pragmatic and removed from the old Rothbard mud-wrestling matches.
I've been saying that for years. Ron Paul's a great guy and all, but casting 1 alienated vote in the House just doesn't do much per se. I don't know how much of the ample and generous following he's had for decades owes to his having been elected, but I suspect that had he spent fewer terms in Congress and more terms practicing obs-gyn and coin dealing, his following would've been just as strong and as influential or maybe more so. Meanwhile Jeff Flake in recent times and good ol' "Individual Man" from Calif. (name I keep forgetting) show how to have more influence in Congress while eschewing the Dr. No role.

And now I got the paras. separated right.

[Robert]

What's the value been of having Ron Paul in Congress? I'm sure you could argue that policy papers and research and training from the Reason-Cato-IHS "Kochtopus" has done more to move libertarian ideas from the ether into practice than having a lone libertarian vote in the House. ...am pleased that the next generations of libertarian-minded legislator-the John Campbells and Jeff Flakes-are pragmatic and removed from the old Rothbard mud-wrestling matches.

I've been saying that for years. Ron Paul's a great guy and all, but casting 1 alienated vote in the House just doesn't do much per se. I don't know how much of the ample and generous following he's had for decades owes to his having been elected, but I suspect that had he spent fewer terms in Congress and more terms practicing obs-gyn and coin dealing, his following would've been just as strong and as influential or maybe more so. Meanwhile Jeff Flake in recent times and good ol' "Individual Man" from Calif. (name I keep forgetting) show how to have more influence in Congress while eschewing the Dr. No role.

And now I got the paras. separated right FOR REAL! NO NEED NO STINKIN' PREVIEW!!

[TrickyVic]

"""And then you run into evidence showing that Ron Paul seems to be perfectly chummy with conspiracy nuts, race war fanatics, and is very closely tied to a group that supports White Identity nitwits, slavery apologists, and neo-Nazis. """"

People that understand freedom, understand that it applies to everyone equally. I don't see why this should be a problem for freedom loving people.

I think it's people who like to discriminate who are really complaining about Ron Paul's alleged discrimination. Of course I expect the 24 hr news channels to make it a bigger story than it deserves.

[KKK]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/15/17443/1121
BREAKING: Ron Paul's Klansman Kampaign Koordinator
by phenry
Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 04:36:42 PM PST
As voters in Michigan go to the polls to vote in today's primary, volunteer coordinators for the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates are working hard across the state. One of these is Randy Gray, a 29-year-old resident of Midland, Michigan whom the Ron Paul 2008 Michigan Campaign Web site lists as the Midland County coordinator for the Ron Paul campaign. Gray's campaign profile page, a cached version of which can be seen here, doesn't go into much detail; there's a picture of Gray with the candidate, along with Gray's statement that "I support Ron Paul because he is in the fight for freedom." The page contains no mention of one of Gray's other roles: organizer with the Knight's Party faction of the Ku Klux Klan

[libertreee]

Reno Nevada is where I live, and it is close to where the Donner Party cannabilized itself.

Much like we see on these RP posts.

I have a friend who is half Mexican. He works as a health care provider, drawing blood. But, he believes strongly in alternative medicine.

He lives with a woman who has a hispanic name as well but doesn't like illegal immigrants. She was formerly married to a black man in the military who beat her sometimes. Their black teenage daughter had a child early on and even though they are pushing sixty, they take care of the baby.

They both drink a little too much but believe pot should be legal.

He was a libertarian city councilman in a town of about 50,000 people from 1990-1994.

They both listen to Alex Jones and love Ron Paul.

People are not easily definable. Leave these cosmotarians to stew in their own incestuous juices. Freedom is a universal right that means accepting people for what they are, not what they think some of the time.

Go Ron Paul!

[Jim]

Anatomy of a smear campaign: A look at how the beltway libertarians tried to ruin RP...

http://formerbeltwaywonk.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/the-orange-line-anatomy-of-a-smear-campaign/

And more on why these so-called libertarians seek to undermine Dr. Paul as they depend on the income tax that Ron Paul seeks to abolish:

http://formerbeltwaywonk.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/january-8-2008/

[Jay]

How can one not think of conspiracy theories having just observed an improbably simultaneous media attack on Ron Paul the day of the New Hampshire primary? A remarkably successful attack that made him plunge from 14% in the polls to an 8% actual vote? After weeks where we heard little about Paul from the mass media and beltway "libertarian" bloggers? TNR from the left, Fox News and talk radio from the right, and piling on from beltway "libertarians" who made a point of loudly repeating the TNR smears and dumping Ron Paul on the day of the primary. Your eyes and ears did not deceive you, all this happened. It is not the result of a criminal conspiracy, but if one uses "conspiracy" as a metaphor for social networks and economic incentives, there is a strong sense in which conspiracy theories accurately, if metaphorically, explain what happened.

The reality behind the conspiratorial metaphor is the social networking between denizens of the Beltway, who sport a wide variety of political labels but are, relative to the rest of the country, a monoculture. I lived there. I went to these parties. These denizens range from the journalists who report the mass media news to various think tank and university scholars at the Cato Institute, George Mason University, and so on. They study Ayn Rand, then marry Andrea Mitchell and testify against tax cuts. Vast amounts of federal money, that stuff that is taken out of your paycheck with such automatic ease, flow into the Beltway area. Directly and indirectly, almost every person who lives in or near the Beltway depends on the very income tax that Ron Paul declared he would abolish - with no replacement!

Many of these paycheck vampires call themselves "libertarians" and inspire us with their libertarian rhetoric to support them with our attention, our blog hits, and our tuition money as well as the tax money that already funds them or their friends. But at the first sign of political incorrectness, all these below-the-Beltway "libertarians" have dumped Ron Paul like yesterday's garbage. Now they can rest easy that they will still be invited to the parties thrown by their lobbyist and government employee and contractor friends, who for a second or two got worried by all those Google searches that Ron Paul might have some influence, resulting in some of them losing their jobs (end the income tax with no replacement?! The guy is obvioiusly a kook, and we don't invite the supporters of kooks to our parties!). Now everybody around the Beltway can go back to partying at the taxpayer's expense. All the money will keep flowing in, hooray!

The lesson millions of young libertarians have now learned from our mass media and our beltway "libertarians"? Libertarian electioneering is futile. Voting is futile. Democracy is futile. It's hip to be "libertarian." But anybody who actually wants liberty is a kook, as can be proven by their association with kooks. Beltway wonks posing as "libertarians" are happy to write things to inflame your hopes for liberty that they don't really mean. Then they make sure that we elect the politicians their friends want - the ones that will enslave your future to pay for full social security for Baby Boomers. The ones that will send you off to foreign lands to kill and die. Not only the journalists who hang out with the government bureaucrats and lobbyists, and not only the politicians who talk sweet while they drain your paycheck and kill your fellow human beings, but even the beltway "libertarians" are happy to let a whole new generation of libertarians go down the tubes in order to keep their Beltway friends happy.

http://formerbeltwaywonk.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/january-8-2008/

[Sam Grove]

What is the biggest obstacle to Ron Paul getting elected?

The same obstacle the the LP has to deal with.

Electability.

Will's argument about electability has frustrated libertarians for a long time.
Why, if we had a vote for everytime someone had said: "but you'll never get elected/you don't have a chance", we'd be in charge by now.

[Brandybuck]

Why do people keep assuming survivalists and "militia types" are racist? Some were, but I suspect the vast majority were not.

I recall those days. There was talk of a race war, but it wasn't a war to be started by blacks, but by communist infiltraters and "insiders". (No, I didn't believe in that crap, but that was what I was hearing). There were race problems, and they didn't seem to be getting better. The Rodney King riots seemed to foretell a time of mindless rioting over race. As near as I recall, those riots WERE about race.

Belief that there might be a race war isn't racist, it's merely a belief that other people who are racist might start one for their own nefarious purposes. Nutty to be sure, but not necessarily racist.

Lots of things drew people into the survivalist movement: the cold war, economic collapse, environmental catastrophe, imminent totalitarianism, etc. A "race war" was just one of the reasons. For militia types, it was almost universally about imminent totalitarianism.

From my perspective, they were nutbags, just like the Truthers today are nutbags. But they weren't necessarily racist. That all right wing fringe groups are racist is a myth promulgated by the SPLC and other leftist groups.

Just my perspective.

[tsehov]

>With the threat of being racked and gutted he himself denounced his discovery that the world was round.

The issue was earth rotating around the sun and not vice verse. This reminds me a story by a friend of mine about his students in a Chicago university, who actually believed that Columbus discovered US in the 18th century. For long I thought American ignorance to be a stereotype created by the European liberal media, but...

[Lew Rockwell is Dirt]

How About This? Lew Rockwell should be chucked out on his ear. His evil racism makes us all dirty. He's got to go.

[Ein Rand]

Ear, ass, whatever. Just get rid of the piece of sh-t.