Moneybomb, Part III

|

The Ron Paul grassroots have set today aside for the Free at Last moneybomb. It started at midnight at $1,365,398.11. Nine and a half hours later, the grassroots have donated about $400,000.

At this rate the campaign's going to fall far short of the haul from the last two moneybombs (although still rake in more than a Friday moneybomb by John Edwards fans, which raised around $1 million.) The Ron Paul forums seem chipper enough:

The headline "100,000 Ron Paul Supporters donate on Martin Luther King Jr Day" is more impressive then saying $x dollars raised. Don't discourage small donations.

If the trend continues, I think it can be pinned on three things.

1. The Newsletters. This won't be the key reason, but it'll be a reason. Anecdotally, from personal contacts and contacts across the web, I know some casual Paul fans have given up supporting the campaign since this scandal. Many will still vote for him, but they're uncomfortable posting signs or giving him cash.

2. The Election Results. We hadn't had any primary by the day of the last moneybomb, and it was still possible for Paul fans to envision surprise 1st and 2nd place primary victories made possible by the cash infusions and the divided field. Nevada raised their spirits, (I ran into some Paul sign-posters yesterday who were giddy about it) but not as high as they were before New Hampshire.

3. The Campaign/Ads. Paul backers have become skeptical that their money will be used effectively. They've seen, and trashed, most of the TV ads run so far, and I've heard that up to $1.8 million was used on those controversial New Hampshire ads. They've bristled at the campaign's response to controversies and the difficulty it has had interjecting into the news cycle.

NEXT: De-juicing PED Mythology

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Many will still vote for him, but they’re uncomfortable posting signs or giving him cash.

    This looks like a nice spot, mind if I put my tent here?

  2. What “scandal”, David?

    Do you mean the scandalous notion that, when the newsletter statements are examined IN CONTEXT, it becomes apparent that you and your fellow witch-hunters either ignored the context, or didn’t even bother to read the newsletters in their entirety before breaking into Ron Paul-smearing song?

  3. Amen to #3. I’ve been donating to the Albany Ron Paul PAC due to the official campaign’s idiocy. It still gets spent on pro-Paul ads running here in NYS, which the Paul campaign is apparently conceding to Rudy.

  4. Gee,

    Ron Paul is apparently smearing himself too, because he said he completely disagrees with what was written in the newsletters and finds it abhorrent.

  5. No one is going to listen to your beltway establishment crap anymore Weigel. There is no scandal. Only an engineered scandal you helped to manufacture. You’re a shameless hack. Nothing more, nothing less. I suggest you and Julian Sanchez focus on the burning issue of gay marriage.

  6. I have been donating with the mindset that Paul is using the primaries to jump start a Independent race for the general election where he will really make a difference. The GOP is a joke.. Candidates are picked by the parties by how much party arse they kiss. Paul is not a kiss arse so is it any surprise they hate him?

    Bkusz
    LBTS, Fla.

  7. Oh yeah, and these money bombs are old news. The November 5 one made a huge splash, the Dec 16 one got some notice, but you’re not going to get any coverage of them from now on. You can only go to that well so many times, guys.

  8. To win Florida?

    It’s a tough balancing act for candidates like Paul, who aren’t running with the expection, even an outside one, of winning, and who are running for the purpose of getting a message out and influencing debate.

    If they talk about some impending victory, they look deluded, and set up their supporters for disappointment.

    But if they don’t, they risk not generating any enthusiasm.

    Tough gig.

  9. For what it’s worth, I have seen very few campaign signs so far here in my part of Florida, and most of the ones I have seen have been Ron Paul signs (and quite a few RP bumper stickers). If Giuliani really is going to make a run here in FL he hasn’t started it yet, as far as I can tell.

  10. Ron Paul is apparently smearing himself too, because he said he completely disagrees with what was written in the newsletters and finds it abhorrent.

    Ron Paul, cosmotarian. I hear he’s even ridden on the Orange Line.

  11. No one is going to listen to your beltway establishment crap anymore Weigel. There is no scandal.

    Yeah, you guys are right. There was no scandal, it was just Weigel beaming TV reports to your cable boxes to discourage you. The rest of the world has no idea the newsletters exist.

    All those news stories, the New Republic article, the TV spots both breaking the story and refuting it, they were all personalized messages sent to the telescreens of Ron Paul supporters.

    Kool-Aid drinkers,
    Please clean the stupid out of your eyes and realize that there’s more at stake here than Ron Paul. If you really believe what he stands for, more specifically the movement that most of you just joined over the last few months, you’d understand that blindly supporting someone is dangerous, and constructive criticism is far move valuable than pretending nothing is wrong.

    Oh, and I predict he’ll still break at least $2.5 million when the day’s out…

  12. speaking of putting it into context…Justin Raimondo has an excellent article written on the matter. I think he unfairly attacks Reason, but everything else is spot on. It’s a good piece of journalism.

    http://www.takimag.com/site/article/why_the_beltway_libertarians_are_trying_to_smear_ron_paul/

  13. They don’t think it’s a scandal, crimethink, because they don’t think the columns are scandalous.

    Why do you think the people who keep showing up to slam Reason can’t stop bringing up “teh gay” as they do so, and are the same people filling this weekend’s Martin Luther King threads with attacks on the man?

  14. Chuck,

    unfortunately that doesn’t mean anything other than the fact that ron paul supporters are passionate. droves of ignorant proles will come out of the woodwork to vote for the statists.

  15. yes indeed,Money bombs do not get the Media’s attention anymore.
    Mitt Romney raised 5 million dollars in 1 day
    and the media barely covered it.

    But we still need to support Ron Paul especially that he came second in Nevada and more people are running for congress praising his name!!!

  16. Taktix–

    I agree that some constructive criticism is necessary. OTOH, I have seen too much of “OMG, I just can’t support Ron Paul anymore after this” for my taste (I do not blame any particular individual). I am disturbed by the newsletters, but I am much more disturbed by the stuff that Radley Balko posts here day after day, and so far I only see one candidate who will do something about it.

  17. Re: #3 (the campaign/ads)

    The latter sucks, and the former therefore sucks as well. There is no campaign without ads. There is only a guy saying interesting things, who has no hope of winning anything. Throwing money at the former, therefore, is like burning money for fun.

    Is it so hard to make professional looking tv spots? Not like money is an object….

  18. Chuck, you must not be from Florida. The correct abbreviation is Fla., not FL.

    FL is the trilateralist/USPS abbreviation.

    Don’t get me started on ZIP+4.

  19. JL–

    you’re probably right. I just think it’s odd that we keep hearing about how Giuliani’s big push will be here in Florida, and yet one week before the primary we have seen nothing. Maybe he’s focusing on the east coast since that’s where most of the displaced New Yorkers end up.

  20. Reason: If you are going to journalism, you should at least include the fact that the Free at Last campaign had a different stated goal. It originally advertised as an effort to get the most donors, not donations. In fact, it called on people to donate only 10 dollars. Now, many are donating more, but it’s worth mentioning that the expectations were never to compete with the earlier money bombs in fund raising totals.

  21. At this point, I’m beginning to think that a few less signs is a good thing. They are beginning to get a bit obnoxious.

    On tv ads, I have seen some volunteer created tv spots on YouTube that were fantastic. The tv ads I have seen have been abysmal.

  22. chuck,

    romney’s minions swooped in on michigan the night before the primary and plastered the state with signs. they are sneaky like that.

  23. Hey look, the tReason beltway sellouts are writing about how they teamed up with other beltwar, neoliberal warmongers to help throw the Ron Paul rEVOLution, and the paleocons whom they hate, under the bus.

    FUCK YOU TREASON MAGAZINE. GO TO HELL.

    You have a new legacy now tReason. The rEVOLution will remember how you fucked them over.

    Again, FUCK YOU TREASON MAGAZINE. You are nothing but a bunch of fucking sellout cokehead beltway cocktail party hipsters. Go run elbows with neocon/neolib warmongers you sellouts.

    I hope that Libertarianism is dead and you sunshine patriots and fair-weather warriors at tReason helped kill it.

  24. Tom-

    Mea culpa. For penance, I will now hit myself over the head 100 times with my copy of the Constitution engraved in stone. In my defense, I can only point out that FL takes two keystrokes, while Fla. takes 4. When you are a two-finger typist like I am, it matters. 🙂

  25. So there was a big change only in the last few days of the advertising for the event. Up until now, it was a $10 event.

    Still, it’s going to raise probably 1 to 1.5 million today. I’m sure Reason wishes it could do so poorly in fundraising.

  26. The biggest money bomb ever will be the tax rebate bomb. Ron Paul funded by the very same government that wishes to exclude him. Priceless!

  27. Just do not complain later when the business as usual gets elected and your phony paper notes are worthless, your costs for oil are out of site, and your standing in a soup line somewhere waiting for government handouts… just like 1929. Does anybody think things have changed? You can contemplate the Ron Paul speeches while counting your new Ameros. Without people understanding what is going on in our government, the banksters always win. Go Ron Go 2008

  28. from personal contacts and contacts across the web, I know some casual Paul fans have given up supporting the campaign since this scandal.

    While the reason staff are gnashing their teeth and rending their clothes over the antique newsletter scandal, Glenn Greenwald is posting about Harry Reid ramming unlimited government surveillance and telecom immunity through the Senate.

    Guess which of those two issues I’m more concerned about.

  29. You know, for a magazine called Treason, you sure do …

    *drink*

  30. For me, I think the main issue is that it is obvious no matter what we are paul does the media will ignore it. He got 2nd in nevada the other day and foxnews dosnt even mention him in the results, but they do publish 10 year old newsletters he didnt even write.

    It is just obvious we the people dont get to decide who the president is, the corperate media does, so this isnt a democracy. The media tells us who we will elect, we dont get to choose. It is a corperate dictatorship. I will still donate today as my little way of telling the establishment to f— off.

  31. Remember, you can’t spell rEVOLution without “FUCK YOU, we’ll rember who were were when the revolution comes.”

    Feel the EVOL.

  32. Maybe he’s focusing on the east coast since that’s where most of the displaced New Yorkers end up.

    Being on the East Coast (Fort Lauderdale), yes, he has been basically living here in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale area for the last few weeks.

    I am starting to see some Rudy stuff, but not a whole lot. But there’s a ton of Paul stuff around, probably at a ratio of *40:1.

    And despite Rudy’s “push” he’s still trailing Huckabee. Remember, there old people and then there’s Florida-old people.

    Rudy could lose voters just because he didn’t promise to make a Florida a 55-and over state or some crap. And the odds of these old people getting to the polls safely are about *1:290.

    It sure will be nice when the “wave of retirees” subsides.

    *These numbers courtesy of the Taktix? Hyperbole Institute, 2008, all rights reserved…

  33. I’m sure Reason wishes it could do so poorly in fundraising.

    tReason wants the revolution to fail because it didn’t originate from the minds of the sellout cocaine snorting beltway wonk cosmotarians.

    Go wonk out about seat belt laws or something you fucking losers, the revolution will still end up doing the job you sellouts haven’t been able to get close to getting done in over 20 years. When the Ron Paul 2.0 comes it will be squeaky fucking clean and won’t be some sellout cosmotarian seat belt wonk. It will also remember who its friends are, i.e. not the Orange Line sellouts at tReason and STATO.

    The revolution isn’t over.

  34. At this point anyone who contributes to Ron Paul has got to be aware that their names will be on his contributor’s list. And with the aura of bigotry around Paul via Lew Rockwell, people may have second thoughts about being on FEC records.

    Look at Reason H&R Blog. We have people here who do not even post under their own names. They use silly names, or initials.

    Given that, who would want their names on a donor list of a highly controversial Presidential candidate with quasi-racist ties?

  35. *sniff!* *sniff!*

    Do I smell a cauldron of tar boiling in here?

  36. Given that, who would want their names on a donor list of a highly controversial Presidential candidate with quasi-racist ties?

    Obviously not a fair weather warrior such as yourself. I don’t give a shit about the FEC, but as an “anti-establishment” type, you sure seem to care about what the state thinks of you. OH NOES!!! SOMEONE MIGHT SEE I DONATED TO RON PAUL!!

    Anyone who is “scared” of having their name on Ron Paul’s donor list is a pussy.

  37. Yeah Kevin, he got second in Nevada alright, with 3 TIMES LESS THE VOTES THAN MITT ROMNEY.

    And he was TIED! for second in Nevada with McCain.

    This, despite the fact that Paul put everything on a win in NV. He campaigned there, made major radio buys. McCain didn’t even visit the State not even once. And still he managed to tie Paul.

    If Ron Paul can’t win in Nevada, a State full of conspiratorialists, tax protestors, gambling enthusiasts and the gold bug/hard money crowd, just where can he win?

  38. Do I smell a cauldron of tar boiling in here?

    Sorry ’bout that, I did the Indian buffet yesterday…

  39. 1. The Newsletters.
    2. The Election Results.
    3. The Campaign/Ads.

    Check, check, and check.
    I’m still driving the Paul Mobile and I’ll vote for him. But he’s out $1,300 I had set aside. Because…

    Partly because of his non-response to the newsletters. But also…

    His poor showing in New Hampshire and South Carolina have shown that all his campaigning has failed to win over any of the independent or undecided vote. The ineffectiveness of the campaign can be laid in large part at the feet of…

    WTF? campaign ads. Paul’s performance in the debates was good from the start and getting better. But the MSM sidelined Paul from the beginning and continued to do so culminating in excluding him in NH. His big war chest put up by us loyal supporters should have been his equalizer. So why run as McCain lite? Paul’s entire raison d’etre is that the GOP has lost its way. So why try so hard to look just like them?

  40. Hey Taktix,

    If your band ever gets over to the Ft. Myers/Naples area, I’ll come see you play. I bookmarked the web site.

    PS–the wave of retirees ain’t gonna subside for a long time yet. With real estate prices coming down, it will probably get worse.

  41. Do I smell a cauldron of tar boiling in here?

    Nobody at beltway hipsters at tReason can smell anything with their noses filled with coke and Marty Peretz’s pubic hairs.

  42. Given that, who would want their names on a donor list of a highly controversial Presidential candidate with quasi-racist ties?
    ——————-
    Dondero,

    What about their resume?

  43. I’ll put my name on that list. Ron Paul is not a racist, there is no scandal and only those who are devisive would perpetrate such garbage…especially those who are really afraid he’s going to win…

    I’m liking it…put my name at the top of the list.

  44. I am going to donate later today. $100 just like last time. I do not make a whole lot of money, I work plenty though. I am totally remodeling my house(myself)and paying rent ’til it’s done. So i have budgeted myself to spare this money so Dr. Paul can do with it as he pleases. I trust him. That’s why I will vote for him. He is honest, he does not beat around the bush and most importantly he is the best candidate to fix this situation we are in. People just do not understand money and the principles associated with it and the economy. The other candidates know this, why do you think they don’t ask you to research or recommend monetary policy literature? They would prefer you took their word for it. Look, i’m no financial expert, but i’m learning alot. Ron Paul is an economic expert, the only expert running for president. All other issues revolve around the economy, that is why the economy is so important. The war and our current economic crisis go hand in hand, alot of people try to separate the two for the purpose of prolonging the very profitable offensive. I know, i’m probably preaching to the choir…just letting you guy know I will be here no matter what.

  45. Hey, Chuck, it’s alright. Restrain yourself from self-flagellation; just remember those two extra keystrokes in Fla. are powerful blows for the cause of liberty.

  46. Well, I’ll throw some bucks his way. I think I can toss him a couple hundred more skins before I hit the limit.

    I’ve never believed he was going to win the nomination anyway, but I’m all for keeping him in the public eye as long as possible. Just as an irritant, if nothing else….

  47. At this point anyone who contributes to Ron Paul has got to be aware that their names will be on his contributor’s list. And with the aura of bigotry around Paul via Lew Rockwell, people may have second thoughts about being on FEC records.

    I have contributed and am not ashamed of it. I am still planning to attend the county convention to vote for Ron Paul.

    Look at Reason H&R Blog. We have people here who do not even post under their own names. They use silly names, or initials.

    There is more than one reason for posting online under an alias. Privacy is one, but not the only one.

  48. eric,

    the fact that a “second tier” canidate placed first “tier” in a major state is newsworthy. if rudy guliani was to place that well it would have been huge news. surely you see that the media is ignooring him on purpose. wether you agree with him or not is irrelevant, the issue is that the media is not “reporting” whats going on in the election, but that they are interfearing with the electoral process.
    that is treason.

  49. whack…ugh!…27…

    whack…ow!…28…

    whack…unf!…29…

    Whew! Thanks, Tom! I was getting a headache.

  50. Frank, we’re just at the very beginning stages of this growing Ron Paul scandal. They haven’t even touched on Paul’s books yet, also ghostwritten by Rockwell. Much the same sort of writings.

    Also, there are the financial questions from past campaigns.

    You are aware that a woman went to jail for 6 months from the 1988 Presidential campaign for embezzlement, right? There were a lot of unanswered questions left over from that whole incident. Back then donors wanted an accounting of where all the $3.5 million they raised went too. They never got it.

    My bet, the media will turn to that incident next, and also to the 1992 Presidential Exploratory Comm. where they raised nearly $100,000. Again, no post-campaign accounting done.

    The Newsletter deal is just the tip of the iceberg.

  51. JL,

    Raimondo’s piece does raise a few good points, but it’s far from the last word on the Paul newsletters. If you’re interested check out my dissection of the piece here. See his reply here and my re-reply here.

  52. “Nine and a half hours later, the grassroots have donated about $400,000.”

    “At this rate the campaign’s going to fall far short….”

    Yeah, it shows a definite lack of enthusiasm, that Ron Paul supporters didn’t set their alarm clocks to wake up in the dead of the night to make their donations.

    What a bunch of lazy degenerates.

    I at least expected to see 5 million donated at 12:01 AM, EST

  53. Hey dumbdero, you know, it’s possible to not be a neo-con, or neo-lib, or cokehead, or “lifestyle libertarian”, or “beltway establishment type” and still be concerned about what was going on with the newsletters.

    I consider myself bordering on anarcho-capitalist; I don’t want the government meddling in anything I decide to do with my life, or anyone else’s.

    With that said, and even stipulating that Ron Paul is the best candidate that an anarchist could hope for, it’s still possible to be concerned about what was written in those newsletters. Ok, fine, he didn’t write them, he repudiates them, everything he says and has said for years speaks to his character. But to say “There’s nothing to see here, just move along” is just dumb. And there’s no denying that it has affected some people’s choice. It’s not just Reason who’s been saying stuff about the newsletters or talking about racism in the same sentence as the doctor. We know that Paul’s fans are very net savvy and do lots of research all over the net, so have found this info in many places other than Reason. I know I sure did.

    Would I vote for anyone but Paul? Nope. Will I vote for Paul? Dunno. Will the newsletters be the deciding factor if I don’t vote for him. Not likely. Will they figure into the overall vote-decision-calculus. Yup. And not because of Reason or Kirchick. This was out there for anyone to find. It was found. Now it has to be dealt with.

  54. Another Amen on number 3.

    I’ve given Paul a modest $50 so far (significantly more than my lifetime political donation total before last year of $0.)

    At no point did I really think that Paul could win, but the beauty of keeping the campaign going is that it should keep libertarian ideas in discussion for a little longer. This is why it’s so dissappointing to see the campaign use the money for shitty adds that tell people all the issues where Paul is just like other Republicans.

    Now that it should be pretty clear to the campaign that Paul’s not actually going to win, hopefully they will start targeting those of us who are unhappy with the direction this country is going in, instead of targeting the R base, which was never going to pick Paul in vote for Paul in the first place.

  55. Hey Eric, which books do you think would present a problem? I don’t recall anything with the tone of some of the paleo-themed newsletters.

    If anything, the typos were scandalous. Hell, even the title of Freedom Under Seige (SIC) had a typo in it.

  56. Well, I donated again today in spite of it all.

    #1… eh. #2… eh. But #3…

    Yes, the “official” ads have sucked.

    The strategy was clearly to fish for votes from the pro-life, pro-troops, pro-God GOP base. I guess it was worth a try. It hasn’t worked.

    The exit polls so far confirm that RP voters are Independents, not lifelong Repubs. They are not motivated by religion. They are anti-war. They are concerned about the economy. And they are anti-establishment period.

    I really hope the campaign uses most of what’s left of their money to create and run some new ads (or even just ONE new ad) that speak to the things that have made Ron Paul the “maverick, upstart, renegade” phenom he is. (especially if he does end up making an Independent bid — 0.01% chance per RP.)

    Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think very many people hopped on the rEVOLution bandwagon because Ron Paul is a grandfatherly baby doctor from Texas.

    Don’t water it down. Raise some hell!

    [ $55K from breaking $2M for the quarter as of 11:15 EST… ]

  57. Reason has lost me as a subscriber for life, and I’m only 22. You people are pathetic establishment sellouts.

  58. Face it, Reason. You don’t hate gay people and drug users enough to be Real Libertarians.

    Philosophical question: does it count as blog whoring if NP keeps linking from one comment thread to another on the same blog? What is the sound of one-blog-whoring?

  59. Blumel and I are on the donors’ list. You know, it’s funny, there’s also a Kyle Dondero of Georgia.

  60. Greg Sarnowski

    Reason has lost me as a subscriber for life, and I’m only 22. You people are pathetic establishment sellouts.

    Drink!

    (I think calling for a drink has also risen to the level of calling for a drink)

  61. maybe its the whole MLK plagiarism thing. i dont really feel the need to celebrate king when he plagiarized at least a third of his doctoral dissertation and a shitload of his speeches. it does seem a little bit weird associating ron paul with a southern baptist minister, anyways. then again, there’s vietnam.

  62. With all the shots Reason has taken from the Paul supporters, I must say that I believe the mag has approached the newletter issue with admirable restraint.
    It would have been irresponsible to ignore the controversy. And I believe the reporting has been fair (the blogging was obviously rushed in the hours following the TNR story breaking, but that’s an inherent flaw in blogs).
    Further, I can’t help but wonder if the shots from the peanut gallery aren’t, at least in some tiny way, professionally motivated. After all, a gig at CATO or Reason has more prestige (and probably pays a lot better, even at Reason!) than one at, say, antiwar.com. And I’m sure CATO and Reason have changed a lot more minds than the fringe Web sites.
    I also think the Paul boosters fail to understand that Reason (IMHO) aims to be a rational supporter of, but not a cheerleader for, libertarianism. Self-criticism is a part of the mission.
    So keep up the good work, Reasonoids.
    As for me, I thought about looking for a spot at the Taktix campground, but maybe I’ll just go back to my compound and pull up the gate again.

    P.S. Had the Paul campaign been well-managed and had Paul pulled reasonable numbers in New Hampshire, the newsletter dust-up would be but a distant memory – again, just MHO.

  63. Ya know, I used to like this magazine. One thing about this campaign season, it sure has shown where the stench of rotting flesh is coming from. I owe Ron Paul my thanks for that if nothing else.

  64. Never heard that before. Amazing. It’s gone unmentioned until now.

    Is the media just starting to read his books. They might finally learn something. They’ll have to dig deep…because Ron Paul is NOT a racist.

    Actually, it’s good that these types of articles are written. MSM doesn’t want to report the impact he is having on the elections, his results and the critical thinking that has been spurred by Ron Paul. Just the distortions they make up. Then people want to know more about Ron Paul. Most like him once they do their own studying.

    I think this is actually helping us immensely. Keep stirring the pot.

    Frank Castaldini

  65. Lemme walk through this:

    We should ignore Ron Paul’s contributions to racist hatemongering because of what he would like to accomplish in the political realm.

    But we should ignore Martin Luther King’s accomoplishments in the political realm because of his persona life.

    And the only people who were ever truly supportive of Ron Paul’s message are those who passionately disagree with Ron Paul’s statements about Martin Luther King, and the racism in those newsletters in toto. Only the people who denounce, er, what Ron Paul has to say on those subjects ever had a principled commitment to Ron Paul.

    I’d say the fact that this blow-up took place around the time of the MKL holiday has proven very enlightening.

  66. John McCain: “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should. I’ve got Greenspan’s book.”

    Well, you’ve had how long to bone up on the subject? This shit is why I’m supporting Ron Paul. I donated this morning, even though, with proper handling from a professional campaign coordinator, he could easily be polling much higher.

  67. And for the record, I actually agree with the premise of this blog post on an anecdotal level. I’m not donating today for these exact three reasons. (Although I never expected a great showing from Dr. Paul in the vote counts; I just wish the campaign was better managed and that’s why I still think #2 has merit.) I just think it has little explanatory power about what the meaning of today’s fundraising effort is if it doesn’t match the previous 4 and 6 mill efforts.

    We spend a ton of time dealing with statistical distributions when we talk about polls, etc., but we think somehow these fundraising efforts are immune from just some natural, benign variance. I call bullshit.

    Second, as I mentioned above, the event was for the longest time advertised as a day for the most donors, not donations. It wasn’t until (quite recently) that Dr. Paul made public mention of the event that the goal was changed to not focus on just $10 donations from a lot of people.

    So while I agree with the three points having given some Paul supporters (the less fanatical ones) pause, I just think it’s far from conclusive that it means much of anything for today’s fundraising. If the numbers exceed my expectations and get near 2.5 million (I’d expect more like 1-1.5 million), I’m hard pressed to really see this as an “issue”. Probably more reasonable explanation is the natural variance these things have and the fact that the grass roots aren’t big money donors. $100 bucks is not so easy for a lot of people. They can’t give every time the call comes, even if they want to.

  68. So far today about $600,000 has been donated.

    At this point on Dec 16th over 2 million had been donated and on Nov 5th 1.5 million.

    So maybe 2 million is a realistic estimate for today’s total.

  69. joe, don’t you realize that some people are immune to cognitive dissonance?

  70. It’s as simple as this: He has no chance of winning and that reality is settling in (and I’m a RP supporter).

  71. NOD to Pugnint…I love it..I am not supporting(donating)RP because of the bandwagon effect, or that he may or may not make TV ads employing slick marketing and Hollywood techniques, that may or may not sway the masses. I support RP because of the Message…… The power of RP is what hes stands for ….The Message…win loose or draw I still support RP. He is brave, and I love the fact that in the debates hes the only one not pandering to the camera making statements that probably originated south of the Belt line.

  72. At a recent World AIDS Conference in Japan, researchers admitted what I have long told you: there is no prospect of a cure or vaccine for AIDS…

    Researchers also admitted that they had been lying about the incidence of heterosexual AIDS to increase funding for homosexual programs.

    Those who don’t commit sodomy, who don’t get a blood transfusion, and who don’t swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay…

    Despite all government propaganda about hugging and kissing AIDS patients, the virus can enter through a mere break in the skin.

  73. @joe | January 21, 2008, 11:35am

    and somehow to connect the two, it involves repeated vomiting.

    and dontcha love the “you’re a neokon” accusations. as soon as that gets thrown to the reason crowd, you know what you’re up against…

  74. Steve, a gig at AntiWar.com not as well paying as Cato or Reason?

    Don’t be so sure. Many believe that Raimondo’s AntiWar.com is a fully-owned subsidiary of George Soros. And as we all know Soros pays quite well.

  75. Those who don’t commit sodomy, who don’t get a blood transfusion, and who don’t swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay…

    Despite all government propaganda about hugging and kissing AIDS patients, the virus can enter through a mere break in the skin.

    Don’t these two paragraphs sort of contradict each other?

  76. Tom, you need to re-read Freedom under “Seige”. There’s some very Rockwellian quotes in there, particularly on Gays.

    I remember back in 1988 the book made some Libertarians cringe. And that was Pre-PC late 1980s. Today, in 2008, reading Freedom Under “Seige” is quite an eye opener. Not quite racist or homophobic, but definitely NOT a sensitive tome, particularly towards gays and minorities.

  77. Some libertarian efforts to refute the New Republic charges:

    Why the Beltway Libertarians Are Trying to Smear Ron Paul
    by Justin Raimondo. (Highly critical of Reason and Cato as well as TNR.)
    http://www.takimag.com/site/article/why_the_beltway_libertarians_are_trying_to_smear_ron_paul/

    Ron Paul is Not A Bigot: Refuting the New Republic Charges
    by James W. Harris
    (Defends Paul, makes the case for supporting him.)
    http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_james_w__080116_ron_paul_is_not_a_bi.htm

    Libertarians Set to Wreck Themselves over Ron Paul
    (Criticizes some libertarian organization, defends and urges support for Paul.)
    by James Herbert
    http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_greg_alb_080116_libertarians_set_to_.htm

  78. You can read a PDF of Freedom Under Siege here – can’t see anything especially ‘eye opening’…

  79. We should ignore Ron Paul’s contributions to racist hatemongering because of what he would like to accomplish in the political realm.

    No.

    But we should ignore Martin Luther King’s accomoplishments in the political realm because of his persona life.

    No.

    And the only people who were ever truly supportive of Ron Paul’s message are those who passionately disagree with Ron Paul’s statements about Martin Luther King, and the racism in those newsletters in toto. Only the people who denounce, er, what Ron Paul has to say on those subjects ever had a principled commitment to Ron Paul.

    No.

    I’d say the fact that this blow-up took place around the time of the MKL holiday has proven very enlightening.

    I posted a message before the newsletter flap started that said it was higly risky to use MLK’s birthday as the target date for a money bomb.

    My opinion, which is on negligible value, Ron Paul rented out is his name to some good friends. Ron was an absentee landlord, and his friends trashed his name when he wasn’t paying attention. Ron has publicly stated the newsletters did not reflect his views and that he is morally responsible for letting his friends use his name in this fashion. Ron has steadfastly refused to chastise his friends by name in public (there is a certain type of integrity involved in not letting the blame get shifted to his friends and then standing out of the way).

    I supported Ron Paul and will continue to support Ron Paul, because this is the first time in nearly 30 years that a candidate with some level of national support has so clearly espoused the theory of government that I adamantly support.

    I have also been deeply dissapointed in the advertising that has been produced to date which I think directly resulted in his poort showing at the polls.

    On the whole, trying to reconcile Ron’s past with a vote for him today is easier that trying to justify any previous vote for an LP candidate over the last 7 presidential cycles.

  80. Dondero: “Look at Reason H&R Blog. We have people here who do not even post under their own names. They use silly names, or initials.”

    That’s rich, Rittberg.

  81. NP,

    the fact of the matter is, much of it was taken out of context and criticized from a PC perspective. This leave a handful of quotes that I find in poor taste, and it’s clear to anyone who knows Ron Paul’s writing style, that he did not write it. what else could he possibly say to make it any better? to call this a scandal is grossly exaggerated.

  82. Tom, just thumbing through Ron Paul’s Freedom Under “Seige” from 1988, I found this little quote:

    “Ever year new groups organize to demand their rights. White people who organize and expect the same attention as other groups are quickly and viciously condemned as dangerous bigots. Hispanic, Black and Jewish caucuses can exist in the US Congress, but not a white caucus, demonstrating the absurdity of this approach for individual rights.”

    Whew! Perhaps in 1988 making such a statement was still acceptable. But in 2008, it sounds awfully insensitive, almost like something you’d see on David Duke’s website.

    Certainly, one can garner that that was ghostwriten by Lew Rockwell. That’s his style, and matches his political views splendidly.

  83. I never thought it would come to the point where Eric Dondero makes more sense than 90% of Ron paul “supporters.”

  84. Gee, my full name is Eric Dondero Rittberg. A bit cumbersome for me to use the whole thing. But if you want, I’ll post under that from now on. Would that make you happy?

  85. I posted a message before the newsletter flap started that said it was higly risky to use MLK’s birthday as the target date for a money bomb.

    Risky, yes. But you have to admire the chutzpah.

    Paul published first person screeds in which he agrees with J Edgar Hoover that MLK was ‘the most dangerous man in history’.

    Now, accepting Paul’s claim that he didn’t write or even read these screeds, it takes some gall to use MLK’s name to raise money to further his [Paul’s] political career.

  86. The biggest money bomb ever will be the tax rebate bomb.

    Don’t forget the “economic stimulus check” money bomb!

  87. Tom, if you think the above quote from Ron Paul’s 1988 book is bad, you should see some of the stuff on Gays and the AIDS crisis. Remember back in 1988 we were at the height of the Crisis. And Ron Paul (Lew Rockwell) used all the hate mongering rhetoric on Gays fashionable at that time in the book.

    Amazing that the media, and Reason have focused so much on the Newsletters and ignored Paul’s book. There’s 8 books written by Paul. Most are economics, gold standard stuff. But the ones that focus on broader issues such as social matters have some statements in there that are quite alarming.

  88. Eric,

    By the way…which of the other candidates are you favoring at this time. If you voted today, who would you vote for. Don’t know if you’ve made it public but I think it would be useful.

    Mine is public. Ron Paul. In fact, if he is not on the ballot in November, I’ll be writing him in.

    Thanks
    Frank Castaldini

  89. DavidS,

    he didn’t choose that day. his supporters did.

  90. “Ever year new groups organize to demand their rights. White people who organize and expect the same attention as other groups are quickly and viciously condemned as dangerous bigots. Hispanic, Black and Jewish caucuses can exist in the US Congress, but not a white caucus, demonstrating the absurdity of this approach for individual rights.”

    tactless perhaps, but essentially true

  91. but he’s morally responsible for the choice of day?

    [ducks]

  92. the fact of the matter is, much of it was taken out of context and criticized from a PC perspective.

    That’s simply a barefaced lie.

    if you think the above quote from Ron Paul’s 1988 book is bad, you should see some of the stuff on Gays and the AIDS crisis. Remember back in 1988 we were at the height of the Crisis. And Ron Paul (Lew Rockwell) used all the hate mongering rhetoric on Gays fashionable at that time in the book.

    While there is some truly repellent stuff on AIDS in the newsletters (much of it backed up by “Trust me, I am a doctor statements”), I can’t anything even remotely similar in Paul’s 1988 book.

    There is a paragraph opposing federally funded research and care, but it hardly qualifies as ‘hate mongering’.

    The individual suffering from AIDS certainly a is victim — frequently a victim of his own lifestyle — but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing
    them to pay for his care.

  93. Eric Dondero writes: Gee, my full name is Eric Dondero Rittberg.

    Why not your first name and surname if you are so keen on not misrepresenting yourself? You’re not one of those self-hating folks with semitic blood, are you?

  94. Frank, I will be voting for Rudy Giuliani in the Texas Primary. If he does not make it to Texas, I’ll be voting for Mitt Romney.

  95. he didn’t choose that day. his supporters did.

    If you read his website, there’s a message from Paul begging for money “on a day dedicated to the memory of Martin Luther King, the great champion of non-violence at home, peace abroad, and civil disobedience against tyrannical government.”

    Perhaps someone else wrote that for him, though.

  96. That’s simply a barefaced lie.

    have you read Raimondo’s article?

  97. Another blurb from Ron Paul’s Freedom Under “Seige” 1988:

    The individual suffering from AIDS certainly a is victim — frequently a victim of his own
    lifestyle — but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing
    them to pay for his care.

  98. Lew Rockwell for writing racist trash

    Ron Paul for not exercising judgement and disapproving it…and for not throwing Rockwell off the bus

    So, Lew, thanks for nothing. You screwed us.

    The New Republic didn’t invent what Lew wrote and Ron signed. They found it and it got on CNN and the whole damn world saw it. Some of our friends who had been friendly to Ron’s campaign distanced themselves – and it’s hard to blame them- and we are seeing a fall off in support.

    Thanks, Rockwell. Now go screw yourself.

  99. Skimmed the comments, saw some really funny stuff, on both sides.

    But, IMO the big reason RP’s Money Bomb has lost steam is that a lot of supporters are in Tap City. They got no more money.

    Or the budget says no ‘cuz the credit card statements from Christmas are beginning to arrive.

    Me? I could give him a little more but since he didn’t flash my name on the Recent Donor screen last time I plan to pout for a while.

    I also was intrigued with Crimethink’s method of getting around the alleged inexperience of the campaign by contributing to a PAC instead. That isn’t a bad approach.

  100. Frank, if John McCain is the Nominee on the Republican side, I’ll be voting Libertarian in the Fall, assuming that they nominate Wayne Root. If they nominate Losertarians like Kubby or Phillies, I’ll hold my nose and vote McCain.

  101. Y’know, a lot of the arguments I see coming out of the Paulbots reminds me a lot of arguments I see on tech forums. It’s pure fanboy/girlism at its best. Especially the arguments that anyone posting criticism of your favored must be on the take of the opposition. Sad. It makes me think David Brooks (gag) was right this weekend when he stated most people make their political decisions emotionally, then rationalize later.

    The whole reason I enjoy Reason (heh) is precisely because they’re willing to take a step back and apply some critical thought. And they welcome a variety of broadly libertarian-ish opinions, instead of hewing strictly to 90/90 Nolan Chart dogma.

  102. Dondero, does your hair come from the same boutique that Gillespie’s does?

  103. Joe wrote:

    “Face it, Reason. You don’t hate gay people and drug users enough to be Real Libertarians.”

    I know he meant that as a joke, but four years ago I had an email exchange with one of the Rockwell.com folks in which he actually did say that Reason doesn’t hate gay people enough to be Real Libertarians. (Specifically, that Reason doesn’t “favor upholding the moral prohibition on homosexuality.”)

  104. I would argue that the civil war for which the Ron Paul crack-up has been the catalyst was a historical inevitability from the beginning of the libertarian movement. We’re paying the price for our “coalitions” – and I don’t just mean membership in the conservative coalition of Ronald Reagan, I mean for the fact that libertarianism itself is a coalition of disparate groups with radically different cultural views – e.g. the two more “mainstream” divisions already trotted out here, but also a variety of others: gold bugs, anarchists, techno-utopians, Objectivists, community secessionists, anti-state socialists, anti-state dominionists, movement anti-communists, conspiracy nuts. There are two ways of looking at this – at any given time we can all be devoted to the rollback of the state at the expense of sentiment, or we can be devoted to our disparate cultural values and inimical to one another. We’re currently in the latter mode.

    That said, I still think comparison Reason to The New Republic is unfair. Yeah, Reason skipped as fast as they could to distance themselves from Ron Paul’s newsletters, and I don’t totally blame some of y’all who think that was a craven move and are mad about it. However, let’s keep in mind that whatever the cultural distance between one another, The New Republic represents the other side of a gulf that is both cultural and political. There may be no other popular journal in America that has been more consistently inimical to libertarians and Libertarians both. Even National Review, the intellectual leaders of a movement that has in the past written us off as as “useful idiots” (i.e. Stalin’s notion) keeps John Derbyshire around and writing. The New Republic, on the other hand, is a leftist magazine that emits a loathsome odor of social populism and has in the past enthusiastically embraced such ideas as “the Daddy State” and launched ideological assaults on whatever strains of anti-statism remained in the left. I contend that if you are a libertarian of any shade whatsoever, The New Republic are the Enemy and should be treated as such.

  105. That’s simply a barefaced lie.

    have you read Raimondo’s article?

    Yes. But, more to the point, I’ve read the newsletters and letters that have been posted online.

    “I’ve been told not to talk, but these stooges don’t scare me. Threats or not threats, I’ve laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one)…” etc etc

  106. “It makes me think David Brooks (gag) was right this weekend when he stated most people make their political decisions emotionally, then rationalize later.”

    Most honest people know that sentimentalism is unfortunately the lens of today. No one’s convinced me yet that it doesn’t explain a heck of a lot of the primary season so far.

  107. but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing
    them to pay for his care.

    One could also say that about anyone with lung cancer.

  108. The individual suffering from AIDS certainly a is victim — frequently a victim of his own
    lifestyle — but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing
    them to pay for his care.

    Yes that’s a harsh statement, clearly the author never took a Dale Carnegie class.

    But my question is this:

    Do libertarians support the idea of tax paid medical care?

    Do libertarians believe that individuals have a right to make their own lifestyle choices and do we expect individuals to accept the consequences of their choices regardless of the how the choices work out?

  109. Rittberg: A couple comments on your piss-poor written rhetoric.
    1) Your initial persuasive propaganda points that provide a moderately PC-offensive viewpoint are a good starting point. Time after time you then submit that this is “just the tip of the iceberg”.
    2) Your efforts to be persuasive then fall very flat and begin to work against you when the additional quotes that are hyped as being “worse” than the first several quotes you provide, and they are really not significantly farther under the ocean like you imply or suggest with your iceberg comment.

    Keep working at it, little buddy, maybe you might hone your skills enough to become a town treasurer at the apex of your political career.

  110. Lew Rockwell has proven to be a malignant influence.

    1) He and the paleo crowd convinced Pat Buchanan who in 1988 when he wrote his “Right From the Beginning” was a pretty straight forward mainstream conservative. But lew, Murray had him hang out with Samuel Francis and the John Randolph “beer hall” conservatives(no joke they called themselves that) and Pat tried and ran in 1992 on hate, fear and that America First crap.

    2)Ron Paul- If Rockwell was a real friend of Ron”s he would admit it and let this issue die and instead he let’s this newsletter stuff hang around his neck so that many people who would otherwise probably vote for Ron Paul are now afraid to be do it.

    3)Posting on his website outright socialists like Aleander Cockburn, John Pilger and Noam Chomsky. I wonder what Von Mises would think about the CEO of an Institute bearing his name associating indirectly his name with socialists? If have a feeling in Von Mises and Rockwell make it to heaven, I can see Von Mises telling St. Peter at the gates, “Just give me 5 minutes with him…..and a rubber hose”

  111. Yes that’s a harsh statement

    It’s not really that harsh – and it’s as bad as Eric Dondero can find in 180 pages or so.

    I don’t think he expected the PDF to be online and hoped to be able to get away by pretending there was something really extreme in there.

    It makes me despair. On the one hand, you have idiots pretending that the newsletters are just a bit of clean knockabout, when they read like a libertarian Mein Kampf.

    And on the other, you have Dondero trying to gin up a scandal where it doesn’t exist.

  112. JL,

    Yes, some of the offensive materials were taken out of context, but his defense of the other quotes doesn’t fly at all. And they aren’t just a handful; I’d say more than half of the quotes he defends are indeed offensive, and not just in poor taste. I really suggest that you read my exchanges with Raimondo before accusing DavidS of not having read his piece.

    I don’t believe Paul wrote the materials myself, but that matters little. What matters is that he has yet to take “moral responsibility” by disassociating himself from the authors of the racist bile that he had knowingly or unknowingly authorized to be published under his name. Until then this incident will remain a scandal to many observers and previous supporters.

  113. Lew Rockwell has proven to be a malignant influence.

    The worst thing about the Siege book is the sickeningly sycophantic foreword by Rockwell.

    Ron Paul has helped build the majority for freedom. In his campaigns, in the Congress, with the F.R.E.E. Foundation and the Mises Institute, calmly and without fanfare, he’s worked for us and for our children…

    We have not seen Ron Paul’s like in Washington since the days of the Founding Fathers.

    How much of the Paul-myth is Rockwell’s creation? Is the saintly doctor really his own man?

  114. what does my asking DavidS if he’s read the article (because he called me a liar) have to do with reading your exchange with Raimando? I did read it, and I found very little to be noteworthy.

  115. JL

    Calling you a liar was stupid – sorry. But it’s very very hard to read the newsletters themselves and claim this has all been made up.

  116. I think the whole list is symptomatic of deeper problems with the official RP campaign. The real problem is his staff is really only experienced in running small dollar House campaigns. What the campaign is doing probably works well to get RP elected in Lake Jackson, but it just doesn’t work for a national presidential campaign.

    I mean, the Newsletters would be a non-issue down there. It really is old news in Lake Jackson thanks to ’96. Not so nationally, where most people never knew those newsletters even existed until TNR broke the story and the rest of the media started picking up.

    Ditto the ads. They’d work in a smaller dollar campaign in a district where most people just want to be reassured that yes, Ron Paul is still a Republican even if he has some different views. Not so nationally. There are 4 establishment Republicans already (Giulliani,McCain,Romney,Thompson) to represent various parts of the mainstream ‘conservative’ consensus.

    Paul needs to highlight his differences and go after the GOP voters who think the party has lost its way. Focus especially on his opposition to anything not explicitly authorized by the constitution and his position on federalism. Remind the good people why free markets are the truly conservative value. And he shouldn’t be afraid to go negative by hitting all the others for their statist positions.

  117. If you want to be fair about racism amongst the candidates:

    Obama made quite a few anti-white comments in his autobiography.

    McCain and Giulliani both have anti-muslim and anti-arab TV adds, painting an entire race as “Terrorists” when it’s only a few who actually are.

    Huckabee supporting the confederate flag in S.C. shows his true color of preference.

    Romney flip-flops so much it’s hard to distinguish if he has any moral values at all.

  118. Is the saintly doctor really his own man?

    Well, he does have a track record in CONgress of voting NO on everything.

  119. DavidS,

    apology accepted. I’m not saying there wasn’t some distasteful material in those letters. I was just shocked at how the TNR article smeared Ron Paul, and had me very disillusioned with the whole situation. after reading Raimondo’s article, a lot of the smears were put into perspective.

  120. Jeffrey,

    All of that is nothing compared to those newsletters and you know it.

    Likewise, Ron Paul still refuses to give back money he knowingly is comming from dubious white nationalists.

    I agree Ron Paul is not a racist but he has shown that he is as much an opportunist as the rest because he and his campign know that those types of people will give and give and give $$$ because they are true beleivers in something versus the typical voter.

    Not giving back the neo-nazis money doesn mean Ron is a neo-nazis just Machiavellian

  121. Wine,

    What about the outrageous pork projects Paul voted to keep include $231,000 for the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association’s Urban Center; $129,000 for the “perfect Christmas tree project;” $300,000 for the On Location Entertainment Industry Craft Technician Training Project in California; $150,000 for the South Carolina Aquarium; and $500,000 for the National Mule and Packers Museum in California.[30] This year, Ron Paul requested more than sixty earmarks “worth tens of millions of dollars for causes as diverse as rebuilding a Texas theater, funding a local trolley, and helping his state’s shrimp industry.

    http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/10/ron_pauls_record_on_economic_i.php


  122. Likewise, Ron Paul still refuses to give back money he knowingly is comming from dubious white nationalists.

    why is it that people would rather that money be in the hands of white supremacists, rather than Dr. Paul? should he do a background check on each of his donors?

  123. JL,

    If that’s your conclusion, fine. But I gotta say, calling the offensive quotes “poor taste” sounds like to me a rather gross understatement. And while Kirchick might have been negligent with some of the quotes I do think Raimondo failed to give his piece less consideration and examination than was due. That was one of my main beefs with Raimondo’s article.

  124. Take Raimondo on Duke:

    What would the “Smearbund” do without David Duke? No smear campaign is complete without dragging him into it… if you take the politically incorrect position, according to the neocons, then you’re marching shoulder-to shoulder with the former Klansman and professional nut-job.

    And sure enough, the Kirchick piece takes the Paul newsletter to task for supposedly having “kind words” for Duke. Yet, if you go and read what the newsletter says about Duke, it is clear the author was merely saying Duke’s success is due to his opposition to affirmative action and the welfare state.

    Here’s what ‘Ron Paul’ wrote in his newsletter:

    The Duke’s Victory… Duke lost the election, but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment…

    Duke’s platform called for tax cuts, no quotas, no affirmative action, and no busing…

    To many voters, this seems like just plain good sense. Duke carried baggage from his past, but the voters were willing to overlook that. And if he had been afforded the forgiveness an ex-communist gets, he might have won…

    David Duke was hurt by his past. How many more Dukes are there waiting in the wings without such a taint.

    To me, that clearly counts as ‘kind words’…

  125. * In 1993, when the worst of the newsletters were being published, Ron Paul very publicly endorsed the Virginia General Assembly campaign of Rick Sincere, an openly gay Libertarian. Says Sincere: “Ron Paul issued a letter on my behalf, soliciting funds from libertarians and votes from constituents. … Dr. Paul (then a former congressman) was aware I was running as an openly-gay candidate and he raised no questions, concerns, or objections. I hardly think a homophobic bigot would have sent out a fundraising letter over his own signature, endorsing (as the Washington Times stylebook would have it) an ‘avowed homosexual’ for public office.”

    http://www.opednews.com/articles/4/opedne_james_w__080116_ron_paul_is_not_a_bi.htm

  126. In other news, since midnight last night the campaign had raised $767,653.20, according to ronpaulgraphs.com. At this rate, we’re looking at $1.5M–$2M, if things pick up later tonight. Still impressive, but disappointing compared to previous money bombs.

    Reading any thread even remotely related to Ron these days is like listening to several broken records (possibly playing either “Dixie” or “Anarchy in the UK”) at once. I don’t have anything useful to add at this point. Can we agree to disagree about Ron Paul and move on? Please?

  127. DavidS,

    I don’t mean to take an opposite position all of a sudden, but do note that the newsletter passage only speaks favorably of “tax cuts, no quotas, no affirmative action, and no busing”; it doesn’t necessarily endorse Duke per se. That’s why Kirchick’s use of the phrase “kind words” was misleading.

  128. Quote by Eric Dondero:
    Frank, I will be voting for Rudy Giuliani in the Texas Primary. If he does not make it to Texas, I’ll be voting for Mitt Romney.

    I don’t know much about your knowledge of the internal workings of Ron Paul’s campaign, you certainly have strong opinions about the man. However, this post alone is enough for me to question whether your political beliefs may be affecting your judgment. I would sooner vote almost any of the other candidates than Rudy. People here take you seriously?

  129. DavidS,

    every sentence of that paragraph on Duke was a fact…or based on facts. The last sentence sums up the feelings of the author. clearly the author is hoping there are more candidates like Duke that don’t have the racist past that he did.

  130. So Jeffrey, do you think McCain, Giuliani, Romney, et.al. if they discovered they’d gotten a $500 contribution from Don Black would keep it, and tell the media to ‘F’ off over it?

    In this Ron Paul scandal you can’t take just one thing. It’s the whole package: The Newsletters, the Books, the Don Black contribution, the praise for Paul on the David Duke website, his attendance at NeoConfederate events, ect…

    You take one thing, like the quotes from his books, and they don’t seem completely bad. But you add that to the other stuff, and you get the whole picture.

  131. David, I worked for Ron Paul for 12 years. Last 6 years I served as his Senior Aide in the District.

    Rudy Giuliani has more prominent libertarians supporting him than all other GOP Presidential candidates combined. His campaign Chairman is none other than Steve Fobes, a guy who came down to Ron’s District and campaigned a whole day for him in his 1996 effort.

    Giuliani’s also got two Cato guys as advisors, Bill Simon and Sally Pipes of the Pacific Research Inst.

    Martin Anderson of Hoover is also a Giuliani Economics Advisor.

    In fact, Giuliani’s campaign advisors read like a who’s who of libertarian economists.

    To say that Giuliani is not influenced by libertarian thought shows your complete and utter ignorance of the man.

    In fact, the NY Times said this of Giuliani in 1999:

    “He’s not even a real Republican, he’s more of an extremist welfare slashing, tax-cutting Ayn Randian.”

  132. Who but a racist would refer to MLK as “the great champion of non-violence at home, peace abroad, and civil disobedience against tyrannical government”?

  133. Eric,

    The fact that he told the media to more-or-less “F off over it” rather than play pander-politics is one of the reasons why I (and lots of others, I suspect) continue to support “Ron Paul Warts And All.”

    As for Rudy “Freedom Is Authority” Giuliani… good luck with that.

  134. Ottawa, yes, let’s move on from Ron Paul. He’s finished, yesterday’s news. He got a measly 3.6% in SC. He was supposed to have won Nevada, and got clobbered by Romney – 53% to 13%. They also said he was going to win Wyoming. He didn’t get a single delegate there. And New Hampshire was supposed to be “Ron Paul country.” He didn’t even bust double digits.

    Time for all libertarians to move towards a libertarian-leaning GOPer who actually has a shot of winning: Romney or Giuliani.

  135. RC didn’t Ron Paul also refer to MLK as a “Gay Pedophile” in those Newsletters?

    Svf, Ron Paul not only has warts he’s got boils as big as the Grand Canyon.

  136. Eric Rittberg says: I’ll be voting Libertarian in the Fall, assuming that they nominate Wayne Root.

    The same Wayne Allyn Root who has been a member of the LP for a whopping 1.5 years of his adult life. The spoiled little prick trying to jumpstart his political career by, in his debate and stump speeches, laying claim to his father’s accomplishments as the creator of the New York Conservative Party. In said debates, he talks about “my dad” did this and “my dad” did that and hence he is qualified by virtue of a whopping 1.5 years in the LP, a figurehead for Las Vegas gambling, and “my dad” selling points to be president. Just another fucking spoiled brat, reminiscent of a more youthful and slightly less arrogant Donald Trump. Philles, even though he is a sneering and socially boorish prick, at least has real credentials within the LP that he deserves credit for.

  137. I think you meant to say Rudy “I cut taxes 23 times as Mayor of NY” Giuliani.

  138. Dondero,

    you’ve convinced me to support Giuliani. forget his atrocious record; he’s got “prominent libertarians” supporting him. pathetic.

  139. And Phillies has never been elected dog catcher, has no political resume, and even less celebrity.

    Go ahead, nominate Phillies. You all will be the laughing stock of American politics just like you were when you chose Unemployed loser Badnarik over Gary Nolan and Aaron Russo in 2004.

    If the LP nominates obscure candidates, they deserve continued obscurity.

  140. Dondero, Benito is the very definition of “authoritarian”.

  141. Yeah, let’s forget Giuliani’s atrocious record of welfare slashing and 23 tax cuts.

    But then again, if you’re a fascist pretending to be a libertarian, tax cuts aren’t such a good thing, are they?

  142. Dondi, Hugo Chavez cut taxes. I guess hes a libertarian too?

  143. Ah yeah, the world turned upside down.

    Now tax cuts = fascist.

    Pro-Choice = fascist.

    Tolerance of Sexual lifestyles = fascist.

    And Ron Paul?

    Blame Gays for AIDS, chummy up to White Supremacists, and call Martin Luther King a “Gay Pedophile”, well, that’s just “libertarianism” ya know.

  144. Show me where Hugo Chavez cut taxes? I’ve never heard that before.

  145. Mr Rittberg says:

    “In this Ron Paul scandal you can’t take just one thing. It’s the whole package: The Newsletters, the Books, the Don Black contribution, the praise for Paul on the David Duke website, his attendance at NeoConfederate events, ect… ”

    This is, of course, the tactic used by conspiracy theorists – to take a set of inconsequential facts, and to insinuate a linkage (where none exists) and use the supposition of a linkage to imply wrongdoing, where none existed. They did this to John Kerry in 2004 regarding his military service, and somehow made him look as bad as the draftdoger prez and VP.

    I suppose this is all irrelevant, as the West’s economy collapses as a result of the cost of Iraq war and the irresponsibility of the fed, and Al Sadr comes back into Iraq politics with a vengence. I wonder how Walter Meade feels about his argument for U.S. Hegemony now ?

  146. Look, Dondero.

    Fiscal conservatism is great but it alone does not a libertarian make. Giuliani has declared again and again his uncritical love of state power, and his record in New York shows a streak of meddlesome nanny-statism that doesn’t square with “libertarian-leaning” at all.

    And Romney has been a stealth liberal in his own state for ages. He has behaved as though taxes are the only benchmark for fiscal conservatism, whilst mandating citizen expenditures and levying fines wherever possible.

    Romney is a pro-business wonk, not free-marketeer. Giuliani is a cozy authoritarian with a vanity cabinet of conservative thinkers. Neither are remotely like libertarians.

  147. It should say IF Hugo chavez cuts taxes would that make him a libertarian?

    Using your “logic” I guess so.

  148. Yeah, I too would love to know how mandated health care is “libertarian”.

  149. E.D., your arguments are almost as lame as your website. did you take an html class at your local community center?

  150. Back to the issues.

    Smaller government, eliminate the IRS, reduce taxes, no foreign entanglement, out of Iraq, control our borders, not Iraq’s. Sound fiscal policy, sound monetary policy. Which candidate best supports these positions?

    We know that Ron Paul is the only candidate who truly stands behind his words. The others, quite frankly, have their fingers in the political air to see which way the wind is blowing. Can you really believe any of the other candidates.

    Stay with the issues, I say. Not character assasination, which would acually benefit Ron Paul in the end anyway.

    Frank Castaldini

  151. Ah yeah, the world turned upside down.

    Now gun banning = libertarian.

    Perpetuating the war on nonviolent drug users = libertarian.

    Perpetuating the war on prostitution and pornography = libertarian.

    Prosecuting and praising the doctrine of preemptive war overseas = libertarian.

    Praising domestic spying, wiretapping, foriegn abductions and torture = libertarian.

    You’ve got it all figured out, Rittberg. Care to address the fact that Aaron Russo was more or less best friends with Alex Jones and other people (like Ron Paul) who you accuse of propagating “devil libertarian” viewpoints?

  152. Hey Pinochet cut taxes! I guess hes a libertarian too.

    You can be a fiscal conservative and still be an authoritarian fascist, Dondi.

  153. It’s not really that harsh

    It’s harsh in the sense that it appears to single out gays for special exclusion from tax paid health care. I understand the context of the AIDS decade and the huge push for the government to do *something* about AIDS.

    However, a better approach would have been a principled refutation of the idea of government as health care provider together with some helpful alternatives and maybe a swipe at drug company welfare would have prevented the issue from biting him in the ass today.

    Of course he’d still be painted as one of those “let the poor starve in the streets” libertarian types but it would be easy for him to get past the anti-gay charges. Same Same for the bigot charges.

    Also would have stopped Megan McArdle from accusing all us old time white guys of being closet racists as opposed to the new libertarians, you know, all the cool kids here at Reason.

  154. The individual suffering from AIDS certainly a is victim — frequently a victim of his own
    lifestyle — but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing
    them to pay for his care.

    Maybe Dondero should visit one of these gift parties.

  155. The racist types against “welfare” always conveniantly forget the biggest welfare in the federal budget (by far) is welfare for old people, followed by welfare for military contractors.

  156. Eric, those may not be the most PC things to write, but they don’t seem to be too shocking. When I first read “Seige” I didn’t find it too controversial, and didn’t find the social conservatism too intense. I see they corrected the typo in the title since the first printing.

    When the paleos tried to be specifically as un-PC as possible was when they caused the most friction among libertarians; we know, because we were in the middle of it.

    People can change, though – the paleolibs and paleocons aren’t as friendly as they used to be. And correct me if I’m wrong – Lew no longer calls himself a paleo.

    The ‘paleo turn’ seems all the more strange and out-of-place now because the socially ultraconservative attitude has little to no appeal to the RP Revolution crowd. D’oh!

  157. As someone who reads Reason, LewRockwell.com, and even The Libertarian Enterprise, and finds something of value in each of them, I ask, in the spirit of the day, can’t we all just get along?

    Or how about copying a page from Ronald Reagan, and vowing to never speak ill of another libertarian?

    When we’re on the fringes of the political debate, we won’t gain any ground by fighting amongst ourselves. Ron Paul has shown that we’re on the 4-14% fringe, instead of the 0-2% fringe. Let’s take it from there, and remember who our enemies are — not each other, but those who would continue to grow the government and destroy our freedoms.

  158. What about the outrageous pork projects Paul….

    Andrew, I never said RP was without sin. I said he votes NO on everything. That is a real positive in my book.

    Nobody likes pork or earmarks. I’m not forgiving him for that. I’m looking at the alternatives and shaking my head.

    I also think he, like many Reasonoids, is out of his mind when he tells us that it’s our fault the Arabs hate us. Not that we should be following an interventionist foreign policy.

    I disagree with him on immigration as well (although I give him points for arguing that you can’t have open immigration with a welfare state).

    We’re screwed anyway but I refuse to give a political mugger my voting permission to pick my pocket.

  159. Ottawa, yes, let’s move on from Ron Paul. Time for all libertarians to move towards a libertarian-leaning GOPer who actually has a shot of winning: Romney or Giuliani.

    Mr. Dondero, I didn’t want to name names, because you’re not the only one making a fool of yourself, on either side, but clearly subtlety is especially lost on you.

    I’m not imprevious to persuasion. But if I, as a libertarian, were going to decide I should take another look at Guiliani or Romney, and give up on Ron Paul, it wouldn’t necessarily be at the behest of a disgruntled former employeee of Dr. Paul who seems to have nothing better to do with his time than win useless arguments against Dr. Paul’s remaining supporters on libertarian message boards. You’re not impressing anybody but yourself.

    I’m willing to move on. I wonder if anyone else is around here.

  160. in case you missed it among all the white noise around here…

    Reason fave former N.M. Gov Gary Johnson officially endorsed Ron Paul for President today.

  161. vowing to never speak ill of another libertarian?

    libertarians are like the Mob, gotta go to the mattresses every four or five years.

    I know, I said that a couple of days ago. Different crowd today though.

  162. Just what Andrew said at 12:32pm

    Lew Rockwell is no friend of Dr. Paul and no friend of freedom. He should admit what he has done. His racism has infected our movement and tainted us all. It’s hard now in plenty of circles (not only readers of Reason) to proudly hold up Dr. Paul’s banner. I’ve had lots of blowback from family and friends and have not found it easy to continue my support for Dr. Paul. Some would have supported Dr. Paul and now won’t. I knew that there were people like Rockwell and Storm front following the campaign, but I thought that they were just kooks who would support anyone on the outside. I did not know how central Rockwell was.

    Mr. Rockwell….are you reading this? I hope you know what we think of you. You’re a sick person who hates blacks, gays, immigrants, and minorities. And not welcome.

  163. in case you missed it among all the white noise around here…

    And John Stewart (the musician) died yesterday. Hoping Jesse will do a little something.

  164. Does anyone know how to get a copy, maybe pdf, of Ron Paul’s book from the 1970s: “Abortion & Liberty”? I seem to recall some wild, bombastic statements from Paul in that book, stuff like Doctor who perform abortion should go to jail, and women who get abortions are as good as committing murder.

    Why haven’t we seen this book come to light, now that he’s a Presidential candidate?

  165. Giuliani’s also got two Cato guys as advisors, Bill Simon and Sally Pipes of the Pacific Research Inst.

    Is that an endorsement or an indictment?

  166. Adam, the problem is, Ron Paul himself wrote a good amount of those Newsletters. It’s not as simple as you think. He can’t “throw Lew under the bus.” Because he knows he himself is responsible for much of the writings.

    And he also faces the likelyhood of Lew turning on him, and saying “Okay, you out me, and I’ll tell the truth on the whole matter.”
    Lew’s got him by the balls to a large extent. If Ron Paul outs Lew Rockwell, than all Lew has to do is turn around and say, “Okay, I’ll admit I wrote such and such passage, but you Ron wrote this passage and that passage.”

  167. Today I increased by 50% my donation to Ron Paul for President in 2008.

    As to the smear job attempted by contributors to this magazine/website, you have lost all credibility long long ago when you conceded the fundamental issues to the statist establishment and have made yourselves a comfortable niche by occasionally raising mild objections to peripheral questions. For that you have garnished yourselves with the unreserved approval of the neocons who now refer to you as urbane.

  168. Clumsy, meant to say…..

    We’re screwed anyway but I refuse to give a political mugger my permission (by voting for him) to pick my pocket, which is why I’m still voting for RP.

  169. Cesar, no, actually you cannot be a “Fascist” and still cut taxes. That’s an oxymoron. It’s completely polar opposite. It’s like saying one is a Pro-Gun Control libertarian.

    And Giuliani is also Pro-Choice and Tolerant on Sexual Matters.

    Fiscally Conservative/Socially Tolerant means libertarian, the complete opposite of Fascism.

    On the other hand, Pro-Pork for the District, Dissing Black Americans, Calling MLK a “Gay Pedophile,” accepting Donations from Don Black, having Nazi Skinheads as local County Campaign Chairman, Blaming Gays for AIDS, and calling for the jailing of “Abortion Doctors” usually translates to Fascism.

  170. Must…let…go.

    Must…get…a life.

  171. It’s like saying one is a Pro-Gun Control libertarian.

    Um Giuliani is pro-gun control, Dondi. Wow you really set yourself up there, almost too easy.

    I’m sorry, Dondero, Pinochet was a fascist and he cut taxes. Are you saying hes not a fascist? What was he then?

  172. I think most of us are just tapped out.
    I’ve already given $700 as well as volunteered some time.

    I think we might be regrouping a bit.

    Ron Paul will continue getting his message out and growing the campaign.

    Then we will run as an independent.
    Then you will see some serious money bombs.
    I’ll give another $700 when that day comes.

  173. So Eric, what is your real motivation for coming here to disparage Ron Paul. In general, it is bad manners to butt into a conversation and say “wow, the stories I could tell you . . . ” then refuse to actually tell any of them. This is true in person-to-person conversations as well as public forums.

    If you want to explain in greater detail why I should care about Rudy, then go for it. But in regards to Ron, either put up the gory details or shut up.

  174. iowan,

    you’re just asking for fabrications.

  175. Wait, you guys like Ron Paul again?

    The lack of success in fundraising is due to Ron Paul consistently losing. There was once a hope that he could at least scare the establishment. That hope is now gone. Its not due to what Wiegel wants it to be, the curse of being a racist, or not showing enough zeal in fighting racism.

  176. iowan,

    you’re just asking for fabrications.

    That is one likely outcome.

  177. Iowan, sorry, I don’t respond to people who use fake names on line, or silly nicknames. Use your real name, or don’t bother.

  178. Well, um, yeah. If you mean Giuliani is not in favor of allowing criminals to have guns, or the mentally retarded, I guess you could say he’s in favor of gun control.

  179. Well, um, yeah. If you mean Giuliani is not in favor of allowing criminals to have guns, or the mentally retarded, I guess you could say he’s in favor of gun control.

    Nice try, but unless you’re a police officer, you’re not permitted to own a personal firearm in the city of New York.

  180. . . . or don’t bother.

    I’ve managed to not bother through many months of seeing your bullshit.

    Thanks for validating that approach.

  181. “Iowan, sorry, I don’t respond to people who use fake names on line, or silly nicknames. Use your real name, or don’t bother.”

    Goodness, one would think Eric knows that’s a siren call for fake Eric Dondero’s to start posting mock messages on this thread using variations of his name. Eric, you have participated in an electronic forum (IRC/CompuServe/message boards/blogs) before in your life, right? Glad to see that its all about the messenger and not the message, because what’s really important is the darn little name someone chose to use in posting responses on a blog. Not exactly a soaring defense, Eric.

  182. Don’t worry Iowan, Donderooo is just testy that he repeatedly gets called on his thoroughly questionable claims.

  183. Libertarian apparently means suing the fuck out of gun manufacturers now.

  184. Don’t worry Iowan, . . .

    I’m won’t. For some bizarre reason, I was feeling charitable today and thought I would give Mr. Dondero an opportunity to prove that he is a valuable member of this online community. That feeling has now passed.

  185. “I also think he, like many Reasonoids, is out of his mind when he tells us that it’s our fault the Arabs hate us.”

    According to a recent poll of Arabs, I would say Ron Paul is right on why they hate us. When asked what it was they didn’t like about us, they said it was our meddling foreign policy. Contrary to what idiots like Giuliani, Bush and assorted neocon nuts say, what they liked most about us was our freedom and wealth creating economic system.

  186. The #4 reason the MLK Money Bomb will not perform as well as the other two is because some of Ron Paul’s supporters have boycotted it.

    You know, the same folks those “ancient” newsletters targeted….

    http://www.davidduke.com/general/3342_3342.html

  187. “The lack of success in fundraising is due to Ron Paul consistently losing.”

    I don’t think it can really be characterized as failure, isn’t it all relative?

    He’s on course to raise about 2 million today. Sure this is less than Dec 16 and Nov 5, but it’s still a very good amount to raise in one day.

  188. Hey Tom Walls,

    That is true that Lew no longer calls himself a paleo but he still runs in that circle. A week doesn’t go by where he doesn’t have stuff by Pat Buchanan or Paul Gottfried or Paul Craig Roberts or some natvists that quotes from Vdare.com

    If I hang around New England Patriot fans all the time eventually, somebody is going to ask, “Are you Patriots fan?”

    Same with politics. Lew still breaks bread, intellecutally with these guys. If you do a search on Mises.org, the late Samuel Francis’ name comes up quite a bit. Of course, how Francis’ national socialistic views are in line with Ludwig Von Mises has got to be one of the great intellectual tap dances ever seen.

  189. Lew Rockwell is no friend of Dr. Paul and no friend of freedom. He should admit what he has done. His racism has infected our movement and tainted us all.

    It would do a world of good if you could be so kind as to show anything that would back up this allegation. I personally have not read a single statement from Mr. Rockwell that may indicate he is a racist. Being a racist is the same as being a collectivist, something that is anathema to a libertarian.

    I’ve had lots of blowback from family and friends and have not found it easy to continue my support for Dr. Paul. Some would have supported Dr. Paul and now won’t. I knew that there were people like Rockwell and Storm front following the campaign, but I thought that they were just kooks who would support anyone on the outside. I did not know how central Rockwell was.

    Maybe you should only blame yourself for not being more attentive to the facts. You could have read the columns in those newsletters in their entire context, rather than reading the cherry-picking that has been so heavily publicized by Paul’s detractors.

    Mr. Rockwell….are you reading this? I hope you know what we think of you. You’re a sick person who hates blacks, gays, immigrants, and minorities. And not welcome.

    Again, I put you to task to present evidence for what you allege.

  190. That is true that Lew no longer calls himself a paleo but he still runs in that circle. A week doesn’t go by where he doesn’t have stuff by Pat Buchanan or Paul Gottfried or Paul Craig Roberts or some natvists that quotes from Vdare.com

    Oh, my God!!! The man should be horsewhipped! He also links to Slate, Salon and Counterpunch — maybe he still runs in those leftist circles?

    Please, grow up.

  191. Dondero,
    Does anyone know how to get a copy, maybe pdf, of Ron Paul’s book from the 1970s: “Abortion & Liberty”? I seem to recall some wild, bombastic statements from Paul in that book, stuff like Doctor who perform abortion should go to jail, and women who get abortions are as good as committing murder.

    Why haven’t we seen this book come to light, now that he’s a Presidential candidate?

    Because it is vox populi, you dummy. EVERYBODY knows Ron Paul is pro-life. Which is inconsequential, considering that, as president, he cannot forbid women from having abortions. Maybe you have not catch on to the fact that he is a Constitutionalist?

  192. I think I was the first one to use the “absentee landlord” comparison on these threads, and I don’t think that’s tenable anymore.

    Three of the people on the payroll of the newsletter were Ron Paul’s family members. Lew Rockwell isn’t some guy who came up to Paul at a convention and asked to use his name.

    Paul was clerarly in on the “outreach to rednecks” strategy. Does that mean he personally is a racist, homophobic, violence-fantasizing bigot? No, it means he’s a cynical, irresonsible politiciann willing to sell his soul to the devil, or someone whose own old-fashioned, genteel prejudices led to to tolerate the much more vile, Klan-style racism of people like Rockwell, or both.

    FWIW, I believe what he said about Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks on CNN, and I believe him when he says that his ideology is incompatible with racism, but none of that goes to the two points above.

  193. Willie Horton

    joe, do you think George Bush was a closet racist, or merely an opportunist who used the race card to trump his opponent?

    In your opinion which would be worse.

  194. It’s not terribly useful to try to sort everyone into “racist” and “not racist.” George H.W. Bush was born, and completed his education, prior to the civil rights revolution, and he did so within a social order that simply took the inferiority and rightful subordination of black people as a given. At the same time, he saw the tremendous changes that occured during his lifetime, and came to have productive and important business relationships with black people. He also saw one of his children marry a Latino, and dandled mixed-race grandchildren on his knee. Let’s keep in mind that we’re talking about a journey, not a destination.

    Short answer: I think Poppy allowed Lee Atwater to put that racist ad out more Machiavellian reasons, and I don’t think it tells us much of anything about his personal opinioins and attitudes.

  195. Short answer: I think Poppy allowed Lee Atwater to put that racist ad out more Machiavellian reasons, and I don’t think it tells us much of anything about his personal opinioins and attitudes.

    Do you see any parallels with Dr. Paul?

  196. Quite a few, kinnath.

    In the case of Dr. Paul, he acceded to a much greater volume of much worse literature over a much greater period of time.

  197. ok Francisco,

    Please tell us have the views of Alexander Cockburn, John Pilger, Noam Chomsky(all socialists) are compatibble with the philosophy of Ludwig Von Mises?

    For all their talk about Cato “selling out”, nobody sells out more to make their points then the Mises crowd and it has always been like that. One day Rothbard is chewing the fat with the New Left and the next day he is a Pat Buchanite

  198. Three of the people on the payroll of the newsletter were Ron Paul’s family members. Lew Rockwell isn’t some guy who came up to Paul at a convention and asked to use his name.

    Which makes the comments…. what? His words? It is a newsletter, an outlet for different ideas. Having read the total content of those “controversial” columns again, I found no evidence that these words were outright racist or bigoted in themselves. It seems more like the words written by many conservatives at the same period, concerned about the times people were living then. What makes them controversial is the fact that they are being brought to these times, totally cherry-picked and out of context as part of a smear campaign.

    Does this mean that Ron Paul agreed with these words? I cannot say because I cannot read minds. What is perfectly clear is that the newsletters were an outlet for conservative and libertarian ideas, the same way LRC is.

  199. In the case of Dr. Paul, he acceded to a much greater volume of much worse literature over a much greater period of time.

    Yup, Ron has me baffled. His sincerity on CNN was clear, and the local NAACP leader in his district said Ron wasn’t a racist. So the big question is why did he let so much crap go out under his name.

  200. It’s interesting that they raised more money in honor of Guy Fawkes than they will in honor of MLK.

  201. It’s interesting that they raised more money in honor of Guy Fawkes than they will in honor of MLK.

    Not a useful comparison.

  202. The lack of success in fundraising

    Huh?

  203. The lack of success in fundraising

    Approaching $30M total to date.

    Not bad for a total failure.

  204. Dondero wets his pants over “Islamofascism”, yet throws his support behind someone who holds a fascist’s definition of freedom.

    I’d post my real name, but my name is so common, you would still have no idea who I am.

  205. Cactus,

    meddling foreign policy

    Agreed that is a reason the Arab world doesn’t like us. Agreed we should mind our own business. I’m all for bringing every last troop home from every last base worldwide. However, if you think that will stop radical Islam from hating the Great Satan, well, I hope your right, but I doubt very much that it will. The upside is that they may end up so busy with their own little dust ups and civil wars and factional infighting that there won’t be any time to hate Uncle Sam. [shrugs]

  206. election results aer why im done donating…

  207. kinnath,

    Yup, Ron has me baffled. His sincerity on CNN was clear, and the local NAACP leader in his district said Ron wasn’t a racist. So the big question is why did he let so much crap go out under his name.

    Because he’s a politician, and thought it would increase his resources and influence. Why do professional politicians do anything?

    Francisco, his family’s involvement and his obvious knowledge of what was in those newsletters tell us two things: 1) he mislead us when he claimed to know nothing about them, and 2) he authorized those columns to go out under his name.

    And if, as you say, you read the newsletters, you would have noticed that they were written in the first person, without a byline, under the heading “The Ron Paul” Something “Report,” so your excuse that the newsletter just provided a forum for wideranging ideas not authorized by the publisher is untenable.

    Having read the total content of those “controversial” columns again, I found no evidence that these words were outright racist or bigoted in themselves. That’s nice. If the Al Sharpton Equality Report had written similar things about white and Jewish people, “in context,” you would have chewed your lower lip off by now.

  208. Iowan, sorry, I don’t respond to people who use fake names on line, or silly nicknames. Use your real name, or don’t bother.

    As someone who uses his real name on the internet, I hereby invite any and all participants on this thread (except, of course, for Eric Dondero) to use my name instead of your own (on this thread only), so that he can feel better about responding.

    Have at it, folks!

    (I, clearly, have no presidential aspirations.)

  209. Because he’s a politician, and thought it would increase his resources and influence. Why do professional politicians do anything?

    Yes, but he doesn’t strike me as being a dumb politician. The newsletters probably helped him regain his house seat, but it should have been obvious to everyone involved that they would be damaging to a national campaign.

  210. Jake, great idea!!!

    I’d like to debate Dondero on the MLB AL designated hitter rule. Dondero, please respond, do you believe the DH rule hurts AL teams in interleague play?

  211. While we’re talking about looking at the statements in “context,” let’s remember that we’re talking about a substantial number of statements here. That’s part of the context in which we should consider the passages, too.

    If I make one statement about black people that’s a little offensive, maybe I get the benefit of doubt. Maybe I can unpack it and explain that it’s not as odious in full context as it might appear at first blush.

    But when you have a big pile of such quotes, it doesn’t really matter that you can take each one of them in isolation and, by looking at it in just the right way, show that it’s not so bad, really. The fact that you have to keep doing that over and over and over demonstrates 1) that you’re got a problem, and 2) that you are aware enough of the racist content to make sure you write it in a manner that you can defend it.

    Think of a poll that shows a candidate having a 2% lead with a 3% margin of error. Now think of 50 polls that show the same candidate with a 2% lead, each of which has a 3% margin of error. Your confidence that you can draw a meanigful conclusion goes up considerably.

    Hey, Jimmy in the back office said something that might-or-might-not be racist about black people. Again. You mention poverty, he gives you a statistic about black people being on welfare. You mention a story you read about a crime, he mentions the difference in crime rates between white and black people. You mentin music, he tells you he can’t stand rap music, on goes off on a rant about rappers with big, gold jewelry. You mention that your kid is going to college, he tells you how terrible it is that white people are being persecuted by affirmative action. You mention your car, he tells you about the young black men who customize their cars and then talks about welfare again.

    Every single one of his statements can be shown to be perfectly innocent. Regardless, you think Jimmy’s daughter is real eager to bring home a black boyfriend?

  212. Come on Peter,

    This is serious, stop fucking around!!!

  213. kinnath, in the early-to-mid 1990s, who would have dreamed there would BE a meaningful libertarian presidential campaign?

  214. I’m pretty sure joe has the “why” pretty much nailed – it was a conscious strategy to reach out to the hard right and milk them for money and political support. At the time that meant reaching out to racists and bigots of various stripes. I’m pretty sure now that Ron did more than just lend his name – you don’t take in nearly a million bucks without knowing where it’s coming from. The fact Reason isn’t digging into the financial aspect (so far) shows they really are treating this with kid gloves.

    Now, I’m sure it seemed like a good idea at the time. Back during the late 80s/early 90s I don’t think even the most optimistic movement Libertarian could have dreamed in 2008 there would be a Ron Paul Revolution drawing hundreds of thousands from across the political, socioeconomic and racial spectrum. Back then, Libertarian pretty much meant hard right, with a dash of anti-WOD tossed in for flavor. Of course in retrospect we can see its a stupidly limiting strategy. You don’t want to be linked with fringe loonies if your goal is to convince the masses of the merit of your ideas.

  215. Jake,

    I seriously want to know Dondero’s position!!!

  216. Peter,

    But you’re supposed to use my name, not make up an OBVIOUSLY fake new name!!

  217. Ohhhhhhh, my bad!

  218. It’s cool to give and then see your name come up on the Ron Paul site.

    When I gave this time, I thought of my children (they both give to Ron Paul too) and how much better a freer and more prosperous America will be for them.

    I also thouht of Thpmas Jefferson and James Madison-See guys, we’re being vigilant.

    Hw much did each of he last two moneybombs raise?

  219. Like this?

  220. Yes, better

  221. How will we know who the real Jake Boone is?

  222. Dondero will use his psychic powers of course

  223. gotcha!

  224. It’s really just fusionism taken to its logical conclusion.

    Taking things to their logical conclusion is usually a really bad idea.

  225. This will be a Boone to this thread, (haha)

  226. Dondero,

    Why are you dissing Professor Phillies? No one even brought up his name in this thread, ‘cept for you.

  227. *groan*

    please refrain from using puns in my name

  228. I’m Jake Boone, and my wife is, too.

  229. So, DONDEROOOOOO!!!, what’s with the new “I only respond to Real Names on the Internet” stance? You’ve been online before, so I don’t think the fact that a given person might use a nom de tube is really all that surprising to you… do you have any coherent rationale for that beyond “I don’t want to respond to criticism?”

  230. Dondero,

    What is it that makes you hate John McCain so much? Is it that he’s rogue or understands torture? Or is campaign finance laws the bane of your existence?

  231. BTW, also feel free to put “jakeboone@gmail.N0-sp-AM.com” in the Email box when you’re spoofing me, or the real Jake Boone, depending on which one I am. It adds to the verisimilitude.

    (That’s a zero, not a letter “o” in “N0-sp-AM”, BTW.)

  232. I wonder if so many counterfeits will devalue the Jake DuBoone…(snicker)

  233. I have an idea. Each of us should try to call talk radio and tell folks about the moneybomb. Point out that Ron Paul doesn’t advocate government handing out tax money, so he doesn’t get contributions from businesses that want to be bribed like the other candidates.

    I’m gonna call a talk station here in Denver.

  234. i feel like Michael Keaton in that horrible movie…

  235. I’m gonna call a talk station here in Denver.

    i’m going to sit here on my ass here in…wait, where am I?

  236. I’m pretty sure I’m in Oregon.

  237. Ah, excellent, I feel better already

  238. oh hay hai. I’m Da–

    d’oh

    *kicks self in taint*

  239. Jake, I don’t hate John McCain. I respect him greatly for his Military service.

    It’s his image I don’t like. He’s too goddamned old. That’s not what we need for the GOP. We need young, vibrant, preferably Hispanic, Black or Ethnic, and/or female.

    McCain is friggin’ 72 years old! Time for him to exit the stage and let younger GOPers take the helm.

  240. Eric Dondero quote:
    David, I worked for Ron Paul for 12 years. Last 6 years I served as his Senior Aide in the District.

    Rudy Giuliani has more prominent libertarians supporting him than all other GOP Presidential candidates combined. His campaign Chairman is none other than Steve Fobes, a guy who came down to Ron’s District and campaigned a whole day for him in his 1996 effort.

    Giuliani’s also got two Cato guys as advisors, Bill Simon and Sally Pipes of the Pacific Research Inst.

    Martin Anderson of Hoover is also a Giuliani Economics Advisor.

    In fact, Giuliani’s campaign advisors read like a who’s who of libertarian economists.

    To say that Giuliani is not influenced by libertarian thought shows your complete and utter ignorance of the man.

    In fact, the NY Times said this of Giuliani in 1999:

    “He’s not even a real Republican, he’s more of an extremist welfare slashing, tax-cutting Ayn Randian.”

    This was Eric’s reply to my question as to whether he is taken seriously around here. Judging by the ass whooping by the other posters, it seems the answer is no.

    Thank god. I was beginning to think that after the discussion the other day about the Mormons in Nevada that a reasoned perspective on libertarian thought was forever gone at Reason. Honestly, who were the bigots going on about how the Mormons voting as a block was cult-like and akin to the followers of Jim Jones? Doesn’t anyone know a Mormon or have any insight into Mormon culture on this board? Perhaps the reverence for individual rights does not extend that far…

  241. Why did Ron Paul let so much of that “racist crap” go out under his name?

    Duuuuhhhh. Cause he himself wrote a large portion of it. It wasn’t all Rockwell. It was a team effort.

  242. Dondero,

    Not to nitpick, but Reagan was pretty damn old and I don’t think we pick our leaders by image, we pick them by what they will do for us. McCain may be old, but he’s hardly looking to keel over and while he’s got a bit of a flip floppiness, he’s more resolute and trustworthy than “I’m everything for everyone Romney”. Plus, he’s got a libertarian streak when it comes to immigration and he’s a burr in the side of the evangelicals, plus he’s playing Iraq like a winner, not hemhawing about the problems. I think he’s more electable than Romney for these reasons.

  243. Everybody knows that Ron Paul is Pro-Life? Really? I wonder how many of his 18 to 24 year old supporters really know that.

    And Paul wasn’t just Pro-Life in the 1970s. He was a Pro-Life extremist. You should read some of the stuff he wrote on the subject back then. Quite an eye-opener.

  244. We just hit the 2,600,000 mark so that means $1,235,000 so far. Come on guys-give give give!!! And tell your friends and family! Tell everyone! Call talk radio!

  245. I’m Spartacus!

  246. Speak for yourself Jake. I damn sure vote for Presidents based on their image. And hate to break it to you, most Americans do, as well.

    Two words for ya Jake:

    Bill Clinton.

    My Chinese wife doesn’t know a damn thing about American politics. Last couple weeks she’s been forced to watch the coverage and the debates with me. Right away she picked Mitt Romney as “her guy.” This was based completely on his looks. She can’t even understand how anyone would not support Romney. As she puts it, he’s clearly the best looking one in the race.

    Jake, that’s the problem with the libertarian movement, and specifically the Libertarian Party. They have no clue. It’s all issues this and issues that.

    Sorry to break the news to you all, but most people care far more about image.

    That’s why Wayne Root would be the best pick for the LP for 2008.

  247. Dondero,

    Is image you’re only concern about McCain then?

  248. Sir Rudy has a child molester on staff. The one media outlet that inquired it, Sir Rudy told them to fuck off.

    Now that Reason has financial records for “Ron Paul & Associates,” I know we’ll be seeing financial records for “Giuliani Partners” and “Bracewell & Giuliani”… looking forward to it…

  249. Pretty much everyone supporting Ron Paul knows he’s pro-life– many people might support him just because of that. How many Democrats know that Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, is pro-life?

    The previous moneybombs were also before the post-Christmas “How do I pay for all this?” letdown that affects every American business and every American consumer. This is also the THIRD moneybomb and some people may just be tapped out.

  250. And Paul wasn’t just Pro-Life in the 1970s. He was a Pro-Life extremist. You should read some of the stuff he wrote on the subject back then. Quite an eye-opener.

    I was born with my eyes open. Or rather, I will be.

  251. And Jake, Reagan was not quite as old as McCain is going to be when he takes the office of the Presidency. He was 70, I believe when he was sworn in. McCain will be 72.

    Plus, McCain looks a lot older than Reagan did. His hair is white as snow. And he’s got an ugly pink tint to his skin.

  252. Okay, then if everyone knows he’s Pro-Life then why are you all supporting him?

    I thought libertarian meant Pro-Choice. At least that’s what I was told when I was recruited into the Libertarian Party from NARAL back in 1985 in Jax, FL. Nick Dunbar said, “We Libertarians are basically Pro-Choice Conservatives who hate Jerry Falwell.” I said, SIGN ME UP.

  253. Jake, I’d say 80 to 90% of my concern with McCain. Rest on taxes and McCain/Feingold. But mostly image.

    His stances are okay. He scores well on libertarian indexes.

    I’ll change my view entirely if he pickes Sarah Palin or JC Watts as his running mate.

  254. Read this very supportive statement from Nelson Linder, the Austin TX NAACP President. He’s known Dr Paul for over 2o years:

    http://canyouspeakthis.wordpress.com/2008/01/13/naacp-president-ron-paul-is-not-a-racist/

  255. Eric,

    Ok, take away the image, do you think Romney holds more libertarian positions than McCain?

  256. Eric Dondero quote:
    “Okay, then if everyone knows he’s Pro-Life then why are you all supporting him?”

    Are you not aware of the very real philosophical debate in the Libertarian party regarding this issue? It has been covered many times over the years in this very magazine. I would link to the LP platform, but that would be childish.

  257. And, Eric, those for whom abortion is not a deal breaker or are any degree of sympathetic to RP’s views won’t be bothered by that stance. Those for whom it is important, will have to weigh what they think the outcomes of RP’s stance will be against what they think the other outcomes could be.

    We’ve seen that tons of times, “I’m not a goldbug, but…” or stuff along those lines.

    It’s the same thing you’re doing – you have latched onto RG’s positions (aggressive against the middle east), and since that trumps his authoritarian tendencies for you, you support RG.

    It’s all pretty worthless, cuz ZOD will win.

  258. It’s all pretty worthless, cuz ZOD will win.

    Any word from the Cthulhu campaign?

  259. Rick Barton, come on.

    You aren’t even making an effort to read, think about, and reply to what people are saying.

    You aren’t taking part in any kind of conversation. You’re just dropping talking points on us.

    We’re not your audience.

    Rick! It’s us!

  260. Any word from the Cthulhu campaign?

    We’re expecting it shortly. Apparently, it takes quite a while to coordinate kneeling with all of those tentacles.

  261. Eric Dondero does not know what libertarianism is. His posts show that. Oh it’s true that he is able to do a lot of name dropping, but when it comes down to what makes a libertarian a libertarian, he is clueless. He has said (proudly) in the past that he cares about the politics not the philosophy. To him it is all football team advocacy. As long as you call yourself a libertarian, that is good enough for him.

    But politics is not football, and the philosophy is significant. There is more to being a libertarian than being somewhat fiscally conservative and somewhat socially liberal. If that were the criteria, then Bill Clinton would be a libertarian! You don’t have to sign the LP’s pledge of anarchism to be a libertarian, but you do have to be in favor of small government, and both economic and civil liberties.

  262. I’m disappointed, but not shocked that the newsletter scandal has caused some to fall away. I understand why.

    Why doesn’t Dr. Paul just make the announcement that Lew Rockwell wrote them, as his staff chief Tom Lizardo reported, and be done with it?

  263. Ron Paul to get “Jane Roe’s” endorsement tomorrow?

    Click on my name for the link.

  264. Samantha, Ron Paul can’t do that, because Paul himself wrote about 30 to 40% of the Newsletters. It he “outs” Rockwell, Rockwell is libel to turn around and out him. Call it blackmail if you must. I like to think more along the lines, that Lew has Ron by the balls.

  265. I recall the day that I heard Ron Paul was going to run for president. It was exciting. I also recall being excited about Harry Browne’s goal of getting one million votes in the 2000 election. After reading Harry’s book, “How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World”, I was surprised that Harry would run for a political office. It is my opinion that he was more right when he talked about living free in spite of powerful opposition. The exciting thing about these candidates was they had and have the opportunity to educate the public about superior ideas regarding political economy. Unfortunately, I’m sorry to say that I have found these candidates disappoint when they try to win votes instead of sell ideas. I’m not sure that education in liberty will lead to liberty, but it can’t hurt. The problem with libertarian political candidate is that it is an oxymoron. Money sent to candidates gets spent to win votes and votes don’t matter. If any libertarian is compelled to jump into the political abyss, don’t try to get elected. Use the donations to sell the ideas. Then, armed with good ideas the public will take the megalomaniac politicians to task. They will only work toward more liberty and less government if that is what the majority wants. One other thing… Loud protesting activists aren’t take seriously. Well reasoned mature discourse is more likely to affect the people that need to be sold on the freedom message. I’m happy that young people are behind Ron Paul’s message. With maturity they can bring true hope to their future.
    http://www.harrybrowne.org/TopicalIndex.htm

  266. David, there wasn’t any sort of philosophical debate about abortion when I first joined the Party in 1985. Everyone was Pro-Choice. The LP even had bumper stickers “Libertarians: We’re Pro-Choice on Everything.”

    Shame our formerly socially tolerant movement has been taken over by a bunch of sexual privacy regulators.

  267. We just uploaded an article to Libertarian Republican Blog by Andrew Murphey: “Ron Paul’s big Money Bomb a Dud” http://www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com

  268. joe,

    Sorry. The moneybomb has me all fired up and I’m trying to get on talk radio about it.. You may be assured though that I’m reading and thinking about what’s being said. I did put in the Austin TX NAACP President quote to rebut the “Paul is a racist” BS from Eric Dondero.

    I’ll calm down and start debating properly again, joe. Thanks.

  269. Since when is raising over $1.5 M in one day a “dud”?

    You’re pathetic, Dondero. You just admitted above that you basically support candidates based upon image. What idiocy. Why you think anyone takes you seriously is beyond me.

  270. “1. The Newsletters. This won’t be the key reason, but it’ll be a reason.”

    Bahahaha.

    Even the MSM didn’t run with your manufactured scandal. They stopped trying to tar Paul with those ridiculous charges long ago and have turned to ignoring him again. Didn’t you get the memo?

  271. Eric Dondero Quote:
    David, there wasn’t any sort of philosophical debate about abortion when I first joined the Party in 1985. Everyone was Pro-Choice. The LP even had bumper stickers “Libertarians: We’re Pro-Choice on Everything.”

    Shame our formerly socially tolerant movement has been taken over by a bunch of sexual privacy regulators.”

    I love that bumper sticker, I had one. Are you claiming that you have been immersed in libertarian thought for 27 years and yet remained ignorant of the long-standing debate on this issue among Libertarians? The debate has been raging since at least 1976, when Libertarians for Life was founded (Google it).

    Further, didn’t you find it odd that Ron Paul could secure the Libertarian party nomination in 1988 holding the “extreme” pro-life beliefs that you claim he held? I must have missed the debate during the nomination process… Harry Browne was also personally pro-life, but would not use govt. force to enforce it.

    In all seriousness, you are either a lying troll or hopelessly stupid.

    I am pro-choice and open borders libertarian, but I fully support Ron Paul.

  272. Well, all this newsletter crap means nothing when the economy collapses on everyone. Tomorrow should be an interesting day and I have placed my shorts.

  273. Dondero:
    Look at Reason H&R Blog. We have people here who do not even post under their own names. They use silly names, or initials.

    Wikipedia:
    [The Federalist Papers] appeared under the pseudonym “Publius,” in honor of Roman consul Publius Valerius Publicola.

    The Hit & Run blog commenters: no better than the authors of The Federalist Papers.

  274. More inaccurate stuff from Eric. From the link he provided to try to substantiate that the moneybomb is a dud:

    As of 8:00 pm est, it’s only $1.26

    Trouble is that it’s not 8:00 pm est yet and the total is already $1.4 M

  275. Eric, caught redhanded posting articles with wrong information. Oh the irony. An apology and correction are in order on your blog, Eric.

  276. Dondero is generally correct that there wasn’t any sort of philosophical debate about abortion in the LP in 1985. There wasn’t even back in the 70s when I first became involved. Doris Goodwin’s “Libertarians for Life” was an obscure group limited to putting classifieds in Inquiry and Reason. Her group had little traction in the party as a whole. Although David Gebhardt apparently has a different recollection, it certainly was not an issue in the Florida LP until the 88 campaign.

    There was even less debate about expanding America’s empire and preemptively invading other countries. Everyone was for closing our European and Asian bases and withdrawing from the treaties which trapped us into paying a major portion of the costs of defending countries which were certainly wealthy enough to bear the costs themselves.

    Ron Paul met the litmus test on non-interventionism and free markets so well that he was given a pass on the abortion issue since he 1) said it was not a federal issue and 2)agreed to soft-pedal his position. More people were probably put off by his nativism on immigration but he got a pass there too by qualifying with some boilerplate about the welfare state.

    But since then we’ve decided to make a “bigger tent”. Well I guess if the tent’s big enough for war-mongering imperialists and Drug war fascists like Guillanni it can’t hurt to let in a few pro-lifers as well.

  277. Eric Dondero:

    Look at Reason H&R Blog. We have people here who do not even post under their own names.

    But you, like me, do post under your own name, Eric. And if you ever try to run for office, be assured that the plethora of insipid stuff that you’ve said here will be used against you.

  278. Peace, Rick. You bring a lot to the table, is all.

    I like you better as you than as the RickBot.

  279. Sarah Palin is always mentioned by Eric as an ideal “libertarian-leaning Republican”, but she has a very strong pro-life position. She’s got a nice image though, so I suppose that’s all that counts…

  280. No Brett, she does not have a “very strong Pro-Life position.” She has a rather moderate Pro-Life position. Nothing like Ron Paul who wants to jail doctors who perform abortions.

  281. Well, well, well. Now we have so-called “libertarians” threatening other libertarians, ala Rick Barton. Very um libertarian of you there Rick. Whatever happened to “no initiation of force”?

  282. please note: Rick is a gentleman whose opinion he is always willing to discuss.

    And for many of you reflex types, engage joe – you’ll find the same. See how they interact? it’s really cool.

    so there. I enjoy both of them hier at H&R. Better than most.
    *looks at three posters with URKOBOLDian intensity*
    [grins and hopes even they enjoy the fun]

    thanks guys!

    respectfully,
    David

  283. Isaac is incredibly wrong on LP history. The LP was much more Pro-Defense in the 1970s and ’80s. There was little if any talk of foreign policy in the LP back then, particularly within the Florida LP of which I was a member.

    Guess Isaac forgot all about the Libertarian Defense Caucus that was active back then working to preserve a strong defense/strong against Communism plank within the LP.

    But alas, the LP was taken over by a bunch of leftwing Anarchists with the Harry Browne invasion in the 1990s, and the LP purged the Pro-Defense forces.

    But they’re back. Ryan Christiano has re-formed the LDC. Look for the patsy pacifist wing of the LP to be put on the defensive, pun intended.

  284. Oh geez, I’m so, so sorry. I was 20 minutes early. Wasn’t quite 8:00 pm yet. Gee, will you guys ever forgive me? That was such a huge blunder. I should be whipped with a chain for making such a huge mistake. I won’t be able to sleept tonight.

    My gosh, I just cannot believe that on my blog I had the audacity to say it was 8:00 pm est. when it was actually 20 minutes til.

    My sincerest and humblest apologies to all. I’m surely never ever going to let that happen again, cause it was such a huge mistake, a mistake of historic proportions. I’m so embarrassed.

    Again, I apoligize. Can you all ever forgive me?

  285. Jake, I’m sorry. I cannot possibly answer your question. I cannot separate image from issues. Image is an extremely important qualification for me.

    Most of you all here are not real Republicans, so to you all, it doesn’t matter. I am a Republican, and I want to win elections. I especially want lower level Republicans to win offices like for Congress.

    Ain’t gonna happen with some old geezer heading up our ticket.

    72 damn years old. Step aside John McCain. You’re too goddamned old.

    BTW, Chuck Norris said the exact same thing today. Covered by CNN and Fox. Check out the YouTube video at HotAir.com

  286. It’s not just that you got the wrong time, Dondero, it’s that you also got the wrong money total.

  287. David, there wasn’t any sort of philosophical debate about abortion when I first joined the Party in 1985. Everyone was Pro-Choice. The LP even had bumper stickers “Libertarians: We’re Pro-Choice on Everything.”

    That’s funny, because there was when I joined the Party in 1986. I guess a lot can happen in one year. Most Libertarians (big-L) were pro-choice on abortion, but there was a significant number that were pro-life that a strict pro-choice plank didn’t make it into the platform. At the 1988 LP convention, the first I attended, in San Diego, there was a Libertarian’s for Life booth. It was not being shunned either.

    It all comes down to whether or not the fetus is a human being. If it is, the libertarian philosophy asserts that you may not commit aggression against it. But regardless, Ron Paul’s position on abortion is that it is not a Federal issue. Nearly all libertarians agree on this point. It is not up to the Federal Government to prohibit, mandate or fund medical procedures.

  288. Dondero,

    Repeat after me “I am a neoconservative, not a libertarian, a neoconservative”

    If you think for one second someone could read everything you’ve posted here and think you have one iota of libertarianism in you at all, you’re fucking nuts.

  289. I guess we could argue for ever on what constitutes a hard-line position on abortion, but I don’t think Sarah Palin can be considered a “libertarian leaning Republican” given that she’s pro-life, anti-gay marriage, against legalizing marijuana and opposed to gambling legalization. This term “libertarian leaning Republican” is meaningless at the best of times, but particularly so in this instance.

  290. My Chinese wife doesn’t know a damn thing about American politics.

    I’ve always been under the impression that mail-order brides were Filipino.

  291. Happy Jack,

    The good ones. I think the level of quality goes

    Filipina
    Russian
    Kenyan
    Chinese
    Serbian
    Mongolian

  292. I have theory:
    Dondero is actually a leftwing activist trying to scare libertarians away from the Republican party by being a gigantic douche. Seriously, Eric, please go away and Huckablog.

  293. I’m anti-Gay marriage. Lots of libertarians are, as well. I think it’s none of the State’s damn business. They should get out of the business of marriage altogether.

    And you are obviously terribly uniformed about Ms. Palin. She was endorsed by the Libertarian Party of Alaska the last 3 days of the campaign in 2006. She even hugged LPA Chairman Jason Dowell, very publicly, and thanked him at the Victory celebration.

  294. Anti government-involvement-in-marriage, then. Which means gays could still marry privately.

  295. I had a right-wing, gun nut room mate when I lived in Maryland. He once told me “People like me – and there are people like me all across ‘Murica – are gonna rise up against the niggers, and the queers, and the Jews, and the people like YOU!” Longhairs, I guess.

    Anyway, years before, he got himself an Asian mail-order bride, and she dumped him.

    Looooo-serrrrrrrrrrr!

  296. Dondero would allow gays to form unions, but then list them on terrorist lists and have them killed silently by government agents to protect us from teh Islamohomo threat.

  297. Lost_In_Translation | January 21, 2008, 8:45pm | #

    Dondero,

    Repeat after me “I am a neoconservative, not a libertarian, a neoconservative”

    If you think for one second someone could read everything you’ve posted here and think you have one iota of libertarianism in you at all, you’re fucking nuts.

    Yep, he’s fucking nuts. He’s the Dunderweinerhole. Sig heil!

  298. joe…longhair….HIPPY!!!!!!

  299. “And Jake, Reagan was not quite as old as McCain is going to be when he takes the office of the Presidency. He was 70, I believe when he was sworn in. McCain will be 72.”

    McCain will not be elected. If he is the nominee, Barack or Hillary (or maybe Bloomberg!) will be our next president. However, Ron Paul can challenge these candidates in ways that McCain can’t– and I bet you anything he’s healthier than Reagan ever was. He rides his bike for 10 miles a day and says his vice is exercising too much. He seems to be very healthy.

    Harry Browne was a fine man, Dondero, and he thumped you royally on the radio, if I remember correctly. The person who introduced me to libertarianism became interested by Harry Browne, as were many people.

    Just because someone told you something when you “signed up” for the LP 20 years ago doesn’t mean that that can never change. If you think the fetus is a person, you have a duty under libertarianism to protect it just as you would protect any person’s rights.

  300. Cesar, no, actually you cannot be a “Fascist” and still cut taxes.

    You are thick-skulled, boy. Sometimes I just want to reach through my computer to choke you it’s so frustrating at times. Look, I suggest you pick up some literature that Mussolini wrote before and during his fascist movement and get an idea of what the hell the doctrine means. It’s maddening sometimes, but the way you behave isn’t all that different from bleating college leftists who have never picked up a Mussolini book. Skidmark.

  301. I’m anti-Gay marriage. Lots of libertarians are, as well. I think it’s none of the State’s damn business. They should get out of the business of marriage altogether.

    I’m anti-black planning board members. Lots of libertarians are, as well. I don’t think it’s any of the city’s damn business. They should get out of the land-use planning business altogether.

    Anybody buying that?

  302. Libertarian Girl, you obviously don’t know Ron Paul at all. If you did know him, you’d know the man is practically handicapped. He’s got knees that are like jello. I had to carry him out of the car many times on our road trips so that he could make his appearances. Of course, we did our best to hide it.

    Ask anyone who knows Ron Paul. They’ll tell you that he’s got serious problems with his knees.

  303. It’s going on 10:00 pm on the East Coast, and the Ron Paul Money Bomb still seems like a Dud. $1.6 million. They’ll probably end up with $1.75. That’s about 2/3rds of what they had hoped for.

    Yup, those Newsletters have had an effect. People are abandoning the Ron Paul ship faster than you can say Titanic.

  304. oh this is rich..You Paul guys giving Eric the business about gay marriage…Ron Paul is against it as well as are all paleolibertarians…Read Hoppe’s rants obout anarcho-capitalism..In the paleo Rothbard world, communities would kick out “undesirables” included homosexuals and communists.

  305. I recall a certain president who accomplished a lot despite having had polio. Not that I agree with many of his accomplishments.

  306. Andrew,

    Not true.
    See this: http://www.queerty.com/ron-paul-on-gay-marriage-20071210/

    My apologies, I don’t know the HTML tags yet.

  307. Eric: numerous sources of mine deeply involved in Texas politics say that you didn’t create the Republican Liberty Caucus, that instead you ripped off somebody else’s idea. They say you are a complete hack and total backwater hillbilly. Also you have no perspective on any kind of political philosophy, so shame on you for that.

  308. Roger, Eric never said he “started” it. The RLC was a break away from the Raimondo group that wanted to take libertarianism in a different direction

  309. joe,

    Thanks. Coming from you, I really appreciate it. RickBot is deactivated.

  310. Yup, those Newsletters have had an effect. People are abandoning the Ron Paul ship faster than you can say Titanic.

    That’s mighty wishfull thinking on your part there, Ereek Donderweinerhole. Think if you say it long enough and often enough that it will come true? Not hardly!

  311. Thanks, VikingMoose. With your refined sense of fair play, you should sit on the Supreme Court. Hey, Maybe President Paul will appoint you!.

  312. Eric Dondero:

    Well, well, well. Now we have so-called “libertarians” threatening other libertarians, ala Rick Barton. Very um libertarian of you there Rick. Whatever happened to “no initiation of force”?

    I didn’t threaten you with force! And I wouldn’t. Where did you get that? I’m just promising you that if you ever try to run for office against a more libertarian candidate, all the stupid stuff that you’ve said here will be used against you. And that includes your new “image over issues” stunner.

  313. Seems from what I can see…..there seems more of an obsession with Eric on here then the issue of the individual blog. Maybe Eric has some changes in his views since his LP days(which he has admitted, 9/11 changed him). yet I know for a fact that some on here used to be anti-Paul activists in 1988 like Raimondo and Garris and now they are the biggest cheerleaders for Paul. Let’s talk about their “change of heart”….Seems to me two can play this silly he said, they said game.

  314. The internal evidence of the three MLK articles supports Ron Paul’s claim that he didn’t write them. For one thing, the style is wrong. For another, all three make an erroneous claim about Ron Paul himself (that he voted against MLK day). For a third, their frequency – three short pieces in three consecutive months, followed by nothing over the next 17 years – suggests that whoever wrote them was let go or at least ordered to stop.

  315. A little over $1.85M in 24 hr! Nice Moneybomb! This is what Eric calls a “dud”! Of course when you’re more concerned with image than issues as he is…

  316. George, it is a no win scenario for Paul in this regard. If he didn’t write them(which may be true), he should have paid attention to what others were putting out under his name. If Lew would just come clean and admit his involvement, this issue could die down a little. With friends like Lew and Jeff Tucker, Ron Paul doesn’t need enemies

  317. Actually, he did vote against it. He voted “for it” on a vote to decide whether it should occur on one of several possible dates. He voted against it on the final vote as to whether there should be a federal holiday, once the date was chosen.

  318. This website is crap

  319. Hey did anyone hear? Ron Paul is connected to some news letters with questionable content. Who knew? We better let the Reason staff know so they can start to look into it?.

    WTF?? How long are you going to keep giving us the same shit sandwich? We got it. Yup the content was bad. Yup hard to believe Dr Paul didn’t know who wrote them, Yup I think he is handling this all wrong but what alternative is there even in the same universe of belief? Entering and continuing this war is about 1,000,000 degrees worse than the newsletter content. If you have not noticed all the other candidates were either for the war or want to continue and even escalate it. Why don’t we concentrate on some real issues and wait for the memoirs to see who was responsible for the newsletters?

    I think this has just been an excuse for some fair weather fans to jump ship and go back to their defeatist positions secure that they won’t have to work for real change. They can just sit back and complain how bad things are.

    For those of you waiting for a better libertarian minded candidate to come along with a higher chance of success, two thoughts:

    First, there aren’t any.

    Second if there were they would be smarter than to expose themselves to the puritanical view cleansing of the holier than thou professional Libertarians.

    Christ may come back before we see this opportunity again. Oh wait, you don’t believe in that either. We’ll then it ain’t ever happening.

  320. UH OH!

    At this point anyone who contributes to Ron Paul has got to be aware that their names will be on his contributor’s list. And with the aura of bigotry around Paul via Lew Rockwell, people may have second thoughts about being on FEC records.

    Look at Reason H&R Blog. We have people here who do not even post under their own names. They use silly names, or initials.

    Given that, who would want their names on a donor list of a highly controversial Presidential candidate with quasi-racist ties?

    No one would which is why they don’t have to worry about having their name proudly displayed at the FEC as having donated to RP since he’s never uttered the word damn let alone anything racist as far as I know.

    Then again, Eric suffers from the worst kind of food allergy, it’s called sour grapes. His candidate isn’t doing so hot, notice?

    The only DUD here is Eric DUD-dero and Rudy Julie Annie the crossdressing fake libertarian.

  321. Hey Julian Sanchez,

    I quite miss your philosophy and philosophically oriented threads. They were very interesting-Lotsa fun!

    BTW everyone, click on Julian’s name to access his sight where you’ll find a Robert Nozick page!

  322. Yeah Doctors who do abortions SHOULD be jailed..they are killing PEOPLE after all….but then again, Eric wants to bomb mecca…sooooooo

    “Giuliani went to court to safeguard the policy, suing over a 1996 attempt by Congress to undo the city’s protections.

    At the time, Giuliani said the policy “protects undocumented immigrants in New York City from being reported to the INS while they are using city services that are critical for their health and safety, and for the health and safety of the entire city.”

    He lost, but Mayor Mike Bloomberg later issued a new, broader version of the policy that is still in effect.”

    http://www.newsmax.com/politics/giuliani_immigration_fact_check/2007/11/29/53262.html

  323. Ahhhh.

    The implosion and exposure of the propaganda posing as media. After 10 years of being all to aware of it a good portion of the country is waking up to it too. How wonderful.

  324. Anyone who doubts that the Rondroids are paranoid lunatics need only read the posts here to see it is true. It is obvious that Paul is lying about the newsletters. He knows that his buddy Rockwell was behind the disgusting material. And whether he “approves” of it, or is just lying now, doesn’t matter since he published it under his name out of his office with a staff that comprised his own wife and daughter involved.

    But the true believers in the cult of Ron know that none of this matters because the author of those hate pieces, Lew Rockwell, tells them that its a conspiracy by “beltway libertarians.” And Justin Raimondo, aka the Italian Stallion from his days selling his services, tells them its a plot. Never mind that Raimondo is one of the most dishonest scumbags to infest the libertarian movement.

  325. > And whether he “approves” of it, or is just
    > lying now, doesn’t matter since he published
    > it under his name out of his office with a
    > staff that comprised his own wife and daughter
    > involved.

    Can you show this is true?

    I would think if it’s true the “media” would be all over it, but considering that they are both brutally incompetent and horribly corrupt, who knows?

    These newsletters came out in the mid 1990s when he was running for congress, nobody managed to show what you’re claiming to be fact then. The NNACP has defended Paul, they’d like to know where you’re getting your facts from.

    Also, very interestingly, the newsletters were mentioned in Wikipedia since at least September, and Reason Magazine and NOBODY ELSE in the entire media apparently read that entry.

    I don’t know if the media takes me for a fool, or the media is a whole lot stupider than I can possibly imagine.

  326. Now Dondero is claiming Paul is practically handicapped? This is getting hilarious.

  327. While I think it is obvious that Ron Paul was aware of the “outreach to rednecks” strategy. And, further, that attacking the underclass was part of the strategy. That doesn’t mean that he was aware that racist invective was going out under his name.

    The strategy was to build a libertarian movement using “NASCAR Dads.” The author(s) of the strategy thought resentment of the underclass would be helpful. While this may be racist in some broader sense, it doesn’t require racist invective.

    Further, rather than seeing this as all about Ron Paul’s political career, consider Paul as agreeing to do his part for the movement. The purpose of the strategy wasn’t to get Paul back into Congress or elected President. The purpose was to build a libertarian movement.

    Remember, Paul was slated to run for President in 1992. Maybe they hoped to actually win then. But I doubt it. Of course, the people behind this backed Buchanan instead.

    Think about those things.

  328. Andrew,

    Roger, Eric never said he “started” it. The RLC was a break away from the Raimondo group that wanted to take libertarianism in a different direction

    I beg to differ.

  329. Andrew the Donderobot. Your partisanship for anything anti-Paul is pathetic.

  330. Andrew is correct. I have never claimed I created the “Libertarian Republican movement.” That was Justin Raimondo, Eric Garris and Colin Hunter in 1985, with Libertarian Republican Organizing Committee (LROC). I was Florida LROC Chairman in 1989/90. We split off from National LROC due to our differences over foreign policy. LROC opposed the War in Kuwait. We were in favor of it.

    I convinced a couple other LROC chapters to join with me: Arkansas and New Jersey. Also, contacted some other LROCers in Georgia and Virginia and we launched the Republican Liberty Caucus.

    From it’s inception the group was intended to be a Pro-Defese libertarian organization. I’m sad to say that today it’s been infiltrated by too many Paulist non-interventionist who have watered down our original Pro-Defense platform. Hopefully we can win the RLC back to Pro-Defense.

    Obviously, the Anti-Defensers who have infiltrated the group find it uncomfortable that I am listed as Founder.

    But this can be easily verified by numerous sources:

    Phil Blumel
    Brian Doherty
    Tom Walls
    Cliff Thies
    Danny McDaneil

    All of whom were there at the founding in 1990.

  331. Andrew is correct.

    At the 1988 LP National Convention in Seattle, Raimondo and Garris screamed at the top of their lungs at Ron Paul and his wife Carol in the entrance way to the Hotel ballroom, calling him a “Pro-Life Extremist Gay Hater.” There were over 200 witnesses to it. They also passed out a Newsletter “Ron Paul and the John Birch Connection.”

    Now Raimondo and Garris are two of Paul’s most passionate supporters.

  332. Jake, you are playing with words there.

    I founded the Republican Liberty Caucus.

    I did NOT found the Libertarian Republican movement. That was Raimondo, Garris and Hunter in 1985 with LROC. And you can quote me on that.

    Actually, Joe Gentili and Jerome Tuccille founded the Libertarian Republican movement in the 1970s with the Libertarian Republican Alliance.

  333. So I’m confused…was that the Judean Peoples Front, the Peoples Front of Judea, or the Popular Front of Judea…

    Damn splitters…

  334. Actually Roger, if you would pay attention, I have defended Paul on this site. I do not think he is a racist and think Lew and company have done him a huge dis-service by not comming clean right at the start and could killed the newsletter scandel after the first day….Your tunnell vision for not being able to comprehend comments that are not all “amen” for Ron Paul is truly remarkable

  335. You all want to see an example of excellent Republican outreach to African Americans? Mitt Romney video at yesterday’s MLK parade now up at http://www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com

    Now try imagining Ron Paul doing the same and a similar event.

  336. And early chairman of the RLC (and the first I was aware of) was Roger McBride. McBride was the LP Presidential candidate in 1976. He ran on a “platform” of 1) free market economy, 2) civil liberties 3) noninterventionist foreign policy.

    Rittberg/Dondero either has a poor memory, has been clueless for years, or quibbles with the truth to promote his current agenda.

  337. Bill Woolsey,

    Which of those potential explanations seems the easiest to believe?

  338. The notion that the libertarian movement in 1988 to 1996 was extreme right wing is ridiculous. It was small (as always.) With the end of the cold war, Rothbard thought that the “old right” could be recreated. The neoconservatives were looking around for excuses to maintain interventionism. (Starting with a refusal to believe that the Soviet Union had lost the cold war.) Rothbard tried to make an alliance with the existing opponents of the neo-conservatives–the paleoconservatives. The idea was to expand the small libertarian movement of the time into something much, much bigger.

    Some of Rothbard’s long time libertarian allies followed him in this “paleo-turn.” Those that refused this change, usually because they couldn’t stomach an alliance with social conservatives, were subject to nasty invective. That was always Rothbard’s way.
    (Cato had been rejected in the early eighties for moderation. Reason was never in Rothbard’s camp.)

    What Ron Paul today says about racism (that it is collectivism,) was the dominant approach in the libertarian movement of the late sixties until… well today. I have been active in the libertarian movement for 30 years, located in the south. Very few racist crazies have had any interest in becoming involved in the libertarian movement.

    It wasn’t until just recently that I learned that part of “paleo” turn was an effort to appeal to NASCAR dads. The redneck strategy. And that it became reaching out to racists too.

    When I described the recent Reason article about this to my wife, saying that Rothbard apparently had this crazy strategy of reaching out to rednecks, she said, “like he would know a redneck.” Is it really true that Rockwell was born in Boston?

    My wife is southern through and through, and a libertarian since the Clark campaign in 1980. To me, the “newsletter” story is about yankee intellectuals writing what they thought would appeal to “NASCAR dads.”

    In my opinion, belief in negative stereotypes of black poeple are common among southern whites. Though southern whites are very likely to also know black people they like and respect. There are a few crazies who are all focused on “the blacks.” Most of us sort of roll our eyes about them and maybe talk about their odd fixation behind their backs. You know, we are southerners.

    And Rothbard and friends put words in Paul’s mouth that they thought would appeal to “rednecks.” Yeah.. a few.. crazies..

  339. Thanks, Bill Woolsey, that pretty much sums up my recollection of events.

    Eric says I’m wrong wrong on LP history. I wonder why noone else contradicts me.

    Even when you considers people he namedrops he’s hardpressed to find anyone who will confirm his revisionist version of history.

  340. Is it really true that Rockwell was born in Boston?

    According to Wikipedia, for what that’s worth, yes, he was.

    To me, the “newsletter” story is about yankee intellectuals writing what they thought would appeal to “NASCAR dads.”

    You know, that never occurred to me, but I think your onto something.

    I find that interesting, because I could never stand King of the Hill because I could never get over the idea that Hank Hill was some Hollywood liberal’s notion of what a regular working guy who sells propane for a living is like.

  341. Dondero:

    Another blurb from Ron Paul’s Freedom Under “Seige” 1988:

    The individual suffering from AIDS certainly a is victim — frequently a victim of his own
    lifestyle — but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing
    them to pay for his care.

    Wow, you don’t even understand libertarianism; that explains a lot.

    If this is the level of stuff you have, bring it on!

  342. “You all want to see an example of excellent Republican outreach to African Americans? Mitt Romney video at yesterday’s MLK parade…
    Now try imagining Ron Paul doing the same and a similar event.”

    You’re right Eric, I highly doubt Ron Paul would show up at an MLK parade and yell out “Who let the dogs out?” like Romney did. Unlike Romney, he knows how to talk to black people– just like you would anyone else.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.