Ron Paul

Progressives vs. (Ron Paul's Support of) Prostitution, Privacy, Pot

|

No wonder they're not Democrats

Lefty muckraking mag Mother Jones has a revealing list out of "Ron Paul's 15 Most Extreme Positions." Bookmark this as an early entrant in the soon-to-explode genre of progressives and liberals attacking libertarian-flavored Republicans for their lefty-friendly policies. A sampling:

3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states to set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.

4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.

7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.

8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.

The savage!

Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom? Yeah, it's getting hard to.

Related reading: Glenn Greenwald can't possibly be a good progressive because he doesn't hate Gary Johnson enough.

Advertisement

NEXT: Medicare's Chief Actuary: Don't Trust the Medicare Trustees

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. PLUS HE’S A RACIST BIRCH SOCIETY SCUM

    ANYONE HO VOTES FOR RP IS A MOROM

    1. If only I could find an appropriate palandrome to describe you Max.

      1. “Morom” works for me. That’s what I’ll call it from now on.

        1. Or moroM.

        2. Morom does work for you, I agree.

          1. Finally, someone jumped on that. Took you long enough.

      2. don’t let a fear of alaskans keep you from spelling correctly.

    2. What is a MOROM – Mean Official Republican of Means? Modest Obstetrician Man of Margins? Moderator of Reason only Married? Moderate Official Republican only Madder? Miscellaneous or Reasonable old Man? Man of Reason only Moderately; Meaningful or Reasonable only Moody?

      Please clear this up.

      1. Look down the thread; the Urkobold has provided us with the answer.

    3. ANYONE HO VOTES FOR RP IS A MOROM

      Fucking classic. Right up there with this guy: http://www.obscureprotest.com/…..morans.jpg

  2. Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom?

    Uh, not really.

    1. Neither do I. They seem to have that reputation, but I’ve never known why.

      1. The reputation is useful to them, and bestowed by their pals in the mainstream media.

        1. …and sometimes Reason.

    2. Me, neither. I can’t remember the feminists ever being non-prudish. And I can’t remember any Lefty ever being anything other than pro-authoritarian (as long as its the Right Authoritarian!) and anti-freedom (on account of all the false consciousness and shit).

      1. When did feminists ever have any power other than suffrage?

        Do you live in stereotype land?

        1. Name a university and you have your answer.

        2. The insane 2257 regulations dealing with pornography aren’t just from the religious nuts.

      2. Oh I get it, RC.

        You are opposed to the Right to Privacy and ‘Griswold’.

        Sorry – a little slow there.

        1. I believe he is talking about feminists views on porn, prostitution, etc. The maintstream feminist view of pornography is that its exploitation.

          1. shriek is a sockpuppet. I suggest you ignore it.

            1. Is he? I always thought he was real, unlike Tony.

              1. It fucked up the other day and made a comment that showed vastly too much knowledge about both NutraSweet and myself to be who “shriek” supposedly is.

                It’s a damn good sockpuppet, but even good things come to an end.

                1. So who am I a sockpuppet for?

                  Tell me and I may help feed your paranoia.

                  1. You’re MY sockpuppet, bitch.

                2. So you are really the sockpuppet, Episiarch.

                  I gleaned “too much knowledge” on your hidden identity.

                  Your words, pal!

                3. Is there a link for this evidence? I am intrigued.

                  1. I don’t have a link, but one statement he made called NutraSweet and myself an-caps, and while that’s right in my case it isn’t in NutraSweet’s, but there’s no way a real “shriek” would have known that.

              2. At one point he was real. He was pro-freedom with a slight bias toward the blue team. I think he left and someone co-opted his handle and turned it up to 11.

                1. No, early shriek was turned up to 11.
                  It was obvious troll-puppet in its’ infancy.Episi’s right. He has been slipping and leaking through the persona lately.The Neil-puppet did the same thing. I think shriek has been running longer than Neil ever did but it has become much more engaging in the past couple of months.That suggests the puppeteer is not currently running a “real” or alternate persona in the comments.

              3. shriek is real
                No one is that good
                Not even Cesar!

          2. oh yeah – feminists are a huge threat to our freedom.

            All 80,000 of them.

            RC Dean has probably been warning us since Betty Friedan killed our freedoms.

            1. Oh really Shrike?

              May I suggest that at work tomorrow, you tell an off-color joke or display a pin-up of a young woman in a bikini, and see what happens to you for violating your employer’s sexual harassment policy. Or have a domestic violence order entered against you simply because your Significant Other claims to be “afraid” of you — that is all it takes for a 72-hour restraining order to be entered. Then tell me how harmless the feminists were

              1. Or have a domestic violence order entered against you simply because your Significant Other claims to be “afraid” of you — that is all it takes for a 72-hour restraining order to be entered. Then tell me how harmless the feminists were

                Feminists only have power because of the criminal justice system.

                If civilization collapsed, I wonder if sexual harassment laws and restraining orders will still protect women.

                1. No, but for the smart ones Guns will provide their equality 😉

                2. Wow, that’s pretty weak tea. Can we use that for all arguments about threats? The income tax is no threat! If civilization collapsed, I wonder if tax laws will still be enforced…

    3. One should never forget that Prohibition was a progressive initiative.

      Fortunately, FDR was smart enough to understand that it wasn’t working and that its repeal would generate lots of sin tax revenue. Today’s progressives are too dimwitted or hardheaded to see the obvious failures of similar prohibitions.

      1. How amazingly simplistic is this.

        Prohibition was loved in evangelical, rural areas and hated in the cosmopolitan cities for example, a fav of the “Bryanites” as Mencken called them.

        1. Check out this list of the states that ratified the 18th Amendment. Look at the early states.

          Because we all know what hotbeds of modern Progressive thought Mississippi, North Dakota, South Carolina and Texas were!

          Interestingly Wilson vetoed the bill and it was FDR that signed the repeal, yet here we have someone STILL trying to hang it on “Progressives.”

          Incredible what a Beck U degree can do to a person.

            1. Grandma gots to have The Recipe

          1. Because we all know what hotbeds of modern Progressive thought Mississippi, North Dakota, South Carolina and Texas were!

            Wow, didn’t know that. That needs to get brought up next time my Dallas friend starts rambling about how awesome Texas is.

          2. MNG:
            The only reason Wilson vetoed the Volstead Act was that it conflated Wartime Prohibition with Constitutional Prohibition. He held that Wartime Prohibition should sunset at the conclusion of the Great War. http://www.time.com/time/magaz…..-2,00.html Wilson is fairly classified as more of a temperance advocate than a prohibition advocate, though most temperance advocates of the era were really prohibitionists.

            I’ll wager that I can find ten history books that state that Prohibition was a major policy initiative of the Progressive Movement for every book that you accurately cite as stating that Prohibition was not a policy initiative generally advocated by the Progressive Movement.

            1. Eugenics was also seen as progressive.

              1. You know who else liked Eugenics?

        2. You mean those cosmopolitan cities full of Catholic immigrants?

          1. Yeah, Catholic immigrants … and German Protestant and East European Orthodox immigrants who enjoyed a brewski now and then, and native blueblood Episcopalians who enjoyed wine and spirits as well.

        3. How amazingly ignorant your comment is.

          The whole Progressive Movement of the late 19th and early 20th century had its roots in Protestant pietism.

          William Jennings Bryan was one of leading lights of the same Progressive Movement. Mencken ridiculed him because he was a pompous, preachy, progressive buffoon … kind of like most modern progressives.

      2. One should never forget that Prohibition was a progressive initiative.

        So was eugenics.

        1. Got THAT right.

    4. Must be thinking of the campus Left of the 60s. Not that that ever amounted to much anyway. Plenty of sex and drugs dulls the revolutionary ardor.

      1. Yeah, but beyond that, the real leaders of that 60’s New Left movement ultimately were revealed to be nothing other than Communist bootlickers. Granted, the rank and file of that era really just cared about fucking like rabbits and dropping acid (NTTAWWT), but even they adopted a few of the authoritarian bootlicker talking points.

        The only truly New Left figure to come out of that era was, ironically enough, Karl Hess.

        1. Karl Hess only became “left” in any sense because he lost his right to property.

          1. He became enamoured with the New Left, the concept of rabid free speech and personal autonomy. He was essentially one of the first ancaps to really begin viewing liberty from both a left and right view.

            1. Losing his right to property was the “inspiration” for that shift.

            2. Even Murray Rothbard flirted with the New Left.

    5. I read this quote today about progressives and it seems to fit in with this comment pretty well-

      http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler…..alifornia/

      It reminds me of my 18 years in California. We were two middle-class working professionals, self-employed and trying to live like citizens. The problem was, we didn’t have an eight-digit trust fund to pay for the house. When you have 2 people earning $90,000 annually and can’t afford a mortgage, something’s wrong.

      We got out before the real estate crash and moved to Texas. As soon as possible, I got my concealed carry license. What a fresh breath of freedom, to be able to carry personal protection legally.

      People in CA chided me about moving to redneck-land. I decided to be polite to most of them and hold my silence. But if you want to live with angry, intolerant, narrow-minded, mean-spirited people who act aggressive if you don’t agree with their views, move to California.

      1. “But if you want to live with angry, intolerant, narrow-minded, mean-spirited people who act aggressive if you don’t agree with their views, move to California.”

        Are there that many conservatives in California?

        1. Nah, they all left when tractor pulls got outlawed.

          1. They came for the trackturr pulls, and I said nothing, cause I wasn’t a trackturr puller.

            They came for the mud bogs, and….

            1. I’m pretty happy with myself as citing the “truck pull” meme with Minge seems to shut him up pretty damn fast.

              Good times.

        2. MNG|5.16.11 @ 6:40PM|#
          “But if you want to live with angry, intolerant, narrow-minded, mean-spirited people who act aggressive if you don’t agree with their views, move to California.”

          Are there that many conservatives in California?”

          Thereby demonstrating a total ignorance of such fonts of ‘tolerance’ as the People’s Republic of Berkeley.

          1. was tougher for my friend to come out as a libertarian than as a homosexual.

        3. A friend of mine was once at a GOP dinner in <gasp> Berkeley, when he noticed that one guy with a Log Cabin button was being ignored by all the other guests. He went up and apologized to him for the rude bigoted behavior. To which the man replied:

          “This is nothing. At least they aren’t spitting on me like they do when I wear this button at liberal gay events”.

      2. There’s some truth to this, though it’s pretty narrowly confined to San Francisco and the west side of LA. California lacks true college towns, which is where you have to go in America if you want to find truly intolerant, angry d-bag liberals.

        1. As an alumnus of the University of California at Davis, I find strong disagreement with this statement.

          1. It’s always a pleasure to drive by Davis on 80 and see the sign:
            “Nuclear Free Zone”
            And wonder how the atoms stay together in that center of ignorance.

            1. Berkeley has a similar sign. I’d think “Leave your subatomic particles at the door.”

          2. There’s a saying that 9 out of 10 girls in the UC system are hot. The tenth goes to Davis.

            1. Its a gold mine for those with yellow fever. But in all reality, its really not that bad. Its no longer strictly an ag school, so I found that there are quite a few attractive females there.

              Oh and we have bad rap music impersonations too!

              1. I gotta second the observation on the ladies. I was at UC-SB recently and it was a sea of gorgeous Asian ladies. I think they must have some kind of filter for only accepting the hotties, because they aren’t all that pretty in the east….

        2. Spend some time in D.C., especially in venues where the radfems gather.

    6. I think he meant the original definition of the word “liberal”, not the left.

    7. Well, there was that “free hippie love shit”.

    8. “”Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom?””

      Add unbathed reeking of incense and you have hippy. No?

    9. I think there might have been a couple years in the 60’s. Outside of that, the left has been as anti-individual as any party could be.

      Makes one wonder just what the fuck the radicals in the 60’s were thinking that the Democratic Party was on their side. I suspect they just wanted handouts like the farmers got.

      1. Kennedy was a good-looking party guy with a glamorous wife. And their dad liked Ike.

    10. Give more money and power to the government, and the government will crackdown harder on “Prostitution, Privacy, & Pot”.

      That’s a clear reason to never vote for a tax everybody Lefty nut-job.

  3. The USA electorate = freedom for me but not for thee.

    I grew up in the South – still the biggest haters of freedom in the USA. Hell, we couldn’t rent video porn until around 2001 and still can’t buy beer on Sunday.

    1. Sunday Beer is coming shriek

      They did outlaw the yellow fron t bookstores back in the 1970s but the ATL has totally nude strippers since forever.
      Lotta cosmo dumps still make ’em wear g-strings or more.

      1. I used to be a regular at the Cheetah III.

        Went to the Gold Club alot with my friend who supplied their liquor too.

        Yes, Atlanta was ahead of the country in convention men’s entertainment.

        I dated a whore who looked forward to the “chicken pluckers convention” every year. They were apparently pussy-deprived bastards with money.

        1. You dated a prostitute? I have to say, I think Episiarch may be reassessing his opinion of you, because that’s crazy awesome.

          1. “Whore” is generic female these days.

            Keep up with the tubes.

            1. I’m disappointed.

              1. Given the context of his comment, I thought the same thing. What sort of logical leaps would a non-psychotic otherwise make?

                1. That is in response to ProL. I’m awful today.

            2. —“Whore” is generic female these days.—

              I suppose it may be with douchebags who don’t respect people.

            3. And they have the nerve to call us misogynists.

    2. Are there still places that rent porn videos anywhere in the US?

      1. Texas. They’re everywhere here. I truly can’t figure this out.

        1. I’d be shocked if there isn’t one in Tampa.

          1. I’d be shocked if there isn’t one in Tampa.

            ahem…The Todd.

            1. Ah, yes. They actually did late-night commercials for a while, now that you mention it.

        2. You’d think that with the advent of the internet, where you can get damn near anything you want, often for free, the video porn rental places would have gone out of business…

          1. That part of Florida, New Port Richie down to Naples, has a curious demographic that patronizes those establishments. A sizable population of retired gentlemen that pedal their giant, adult tricycles from dirty book store to dirty book store, cruising the glory-holes in the DVD preview booths. DVD rental/sales are often not the primary revenue source for the store, video booths and sales of N-nitrate based inhalants (poppers/rush) are easy money (except for the poor schmuck with the Clorox, mop, & garden hose at closing time).

            1. That region actually starts north of New Port Richey. There’s a rather large store in Bayonet Point.

              1. Nice, Florida (at least when I lived there) varied wildly in tolerance level from one jurisdiction to another. Willy Meggs, the douche-bag prosecutor in Tallahassee, was constantly trying to close the town’s one & only independent, art-house/alternative video store because they had the temerity to rent adult movies (kept in a locked room accessible only to those 21+ with a photo ID). While in Sarasota, the Trail Bookstore has been a hotbed of debauchery for more than 30 years. The Trail is just down the street from the location of the theater where Paul Reubens was busted.

                1. Wisconsin still has (a lot) of porn shops with DVD rentals.

          2. Been years since I paid for any. On my way to work, there’s a place whose patrons appear to be 100% Chinese. I wonder about that- I always thought that they were pretty good with math, computers, and stuff like that.

            1. You’d think, but not always. My wife is actually great with computers, but is terrible with math.

              1. Is she Chinese?

                1. Yeah, that’s why I was chiming in on your comment.

    3. I grew up (and still live) in Mississippi. Porn rentals are frowned upon but not banned. You can buy beer at any time of any day, 24/7. Liquor, however, cannot be purchased on Sunday unless you go to a restaurant or bar–liquor stores are closed.

    4. I grew up in the South – still the biggest haters of freedom in the USA. Hell, we couldn’t rent video porn until around 2001 and still can’t buy beer on Sunday.

      You obviously didn’t live in southern Louisiana.

  4. I’m not sure that article is criticizing Paul there but just pointing out that his positions are “extreme for most people in both major political parties.” Not necessarily the same thing at all.

    1. “Yet despite Paul’s growing cult following, many of his views are just a tad extreme for voters from either major party. To name just a few of these politically dicey positions, President Ron Paul would like to…

      MNG: “I’m not sure that article is criticizing Paul there but just pointing out that his positions are “extreme for most people in both major political parties.””

      Yes, one praises someone by using words like “cult”, “a tad extreme”, and “dicey”.

      1. “Yet despite Paul’s growing cult following, many of his views are just a tad extreme for voters from either major party. To name just a few of these politically dicey positions”

        I’m curious was it the usual obtuseness or disingenuousness that made you leave out such critical qualifying adjectives as “politically” and “for voters from either major party”?

        1. And the phrase “growing cult” is not usually used to refer to religious nuts but in this common sense of the word ‘cult’

          an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers

          It strikes me that the article was simply introducing Paul and some of his out of the mainstream views to folks who are not used to such things in a nationally recognized politician.

          1. I will suggest that your view of reality, in this case, if different from other people. Most other people.

            1. 1. Paul’s ideas are a tad extreme for regular Dem and Rep voters. True or false?

              2. Paul’s views are politically dicey for an attempt to win over those same voters. True or false.

              3. The phrase ‘growing cult’ is often not used in a derisive manner but to indicate the growing admiration and devotion to a figure or cause. True or false?

              1. Nice try. No – the writer was being a snarky ass. Go back to sleep, MNG.

              2. Yeah, this reminds me of when MoJo ran a bunch of pieces on politicians they like declaring why their views are extreme and politically dicey — in laundry list form — to the hoi polloi, who of course would never read MoJo for its extreme and politically dicey content.

                Anyone can list anything, but the question is why, and the answer is that MoJo is willing to attack even issues their writers and readers support for the sake of pissing on libertarians.

                1. Also, how fucking even-handed can you be when you use phrases like “eviscerate entitlements,” “enable extremism,” “protect sexual predators,” “keep monopolies intact,” “stop policing the environment,” “first, do harm”? Sure, they’re fair portrayals if you understand the nuance — like the opposition to state-granted monopolies or, for example, the use of property rights of water to prevent degradation — but this is a pure hit piece.

                  Along with pure demagogic bullshit like “rescind the Bin Laden raid,” “legalize all drugs” and “diss Mother Teresa.” Obviously that glosses over us not being involved in wars of aggression, and MoJo itself would have likely preferred withdrawal such that we’d have further difficulty finding OBL.

                  It’s almost like you imagine this list arose spontaneously.

                  1. +1,000,000

          2. MNG — You have to twist the fuck out of the ordinary meaning of words to try and think the writer of that article was even neutral about Paul, much less praising him.

            The fact that no one else here, or IIRC anyone in the comments section in Mother Jones, was joining you in being an apologetic for the tone of that article should be a clue that you’re trying too hard to excuse the writer.

            1. If it was an article in Extreme Skateboarding, then maybe one might deduce that “extreme” was being used as a compliment. Or maybe an article in Cult Fanfic Magazine might use “cult” as a compliment. But, in Mother Jones, writing about a Republican, those words should be considered to have their usual derogatory meaning unless the author explicitly said otherwise.

    2. “cult” and “dicey” aren’t bad, but the headings like “Diss Mother Teresa”, “Enable Extremism”, and “Protect Sexual Predators” kind of give the game away.

      1. I was surprised to see MoJo implicitly endorse internet monitoring. MoJo and the Soccer Moms – who knew?

        1. MoJo and the Soccer Moms – who knew?

          One of the beauties of no-fault divorce – such marriages of convenience can be terminated as soon as the bed gets cold.

  5. I like how the left is trying too compete with the right on who can legislate morality the most. What an exciting competition! With Harry Ried attacking prostitution and Obama’s expansion of the drug war, soon the social conservatives won’t know who to vote for.

  6. The comments on the MJ article are somewhat encouraging. Most of the people there are taking the author to task for the piece, and several voice support for some of the “extreme” points, or state that they don’t find them “extreme” at all.

    I think there’s a growing divergence between actual leftists (who would support the social side of the libertarian agenda) and the mainstream dem party, which is 110% statist. It’s like assuming that republican must = conservative, when as we know, there is a huge difference between traditional conservatives, neocons, libertarians, etc.

    1. So what does a classic liberal do?

      Hayek and Rand (and Buffett) hated conservatives (as I do) and would never support a Reagan type authoritarian/theocrat.

      Real question. No shit.

      1. So what does a classic liberal do?

        Not vote for statist douchebags?

        1. Thus my Bush the Lesser/GOP hatred!

          Finally – a breakthrough, class!

          1. A breakthrough for you?

            Bush jr. isn’t exactly loved here.

            Now, waiting for you to diss some left-statist — that would be an actual breakthru.

            1. Oh – Michael Moore is a fucking douchebag with his handgun ban crap – but he doesn’t vote in Congress.

              Affirmative action is crap. HUD is crap. Ethanol and farm subsidies should die. Oil subsidies should die.

              Medicare should be cost controlled immediately and kill the doc fix now. There should be end of life max outs on Medicare.

              I am more Draconian than Paul Ryan – he pussed out by not tackling Medicare costs now – (he waits until 2021 or so) – freeze Medicare NOW!

              1. Huh. My preconceptions, they are…strained. How do you feel about Obama’s results? And for that matter, what about RP?

          2. shrike|5.16.11 @ 6:31PM|#
            “Thus my Bush the Lesser/GOP hatred!”
            And your love of Obama, too!

        2. Not vote for statist douchebags?

          If libertarians refuse to vote, that means the statists and idiots get to choose what govt you have to live under.

          1. And that would be different how?

          2. Well, no, if libertarians refuse to vote for statist douchebags, and instead vote for the non-statist non-d-bags on the ballot, or leave the ballot blank if no good alternative are present, they’ve sent a message about what it would take to get their vote.

            If you only vote for left-statists or right-statists, that means you are JOINING and SUPPORTING statists in choosing a gov’t like that.

            Which of these two options supports liberty?

            1. You left out a couple of options:

              1) leave the country

              2) revolution. Preferably in the form of a bloodbath.

              1. Molotov Cocktails on the House! (of representatives)

              2. “1) leave the country”

                And go where? Can we all choose one country and Galt’s Gulch it?

                1. And go where?

                  Free State Project? It’s not another country, but if all libertarians went there we might be able to secede if it came to that. Or at least get four electoral votes for a Libertarian (or libertarian) candidate.

            2. they’ve sent a message about what it would take to get their vote.

              Usually, what it would take to get hardcore picky libertarian votes is going to alienate much larger numbers of statists and idiots. So that message is going to fall on deaf ears.

              If you vote for the less statist option you at least encourage the statists to moderate their statism.

              Those who refuse to vote are not absolved from responsibility for the outcome — indeed their abstinence has given implicit consent to the choice of the majority of those who do.

          3. Whereas if we vote, we get the same piece of shit, and have to live with knowing we helped create it.

            1. The idea is to try to vote for the less shitty piece of shit. For instance, one who will appoint justices who will rule that the First Amendment protects political donations and the Second protects an individual right to bear arms that actually has teeth…even if you’re not thrilled with his spending and warmongering (which probably would have been just as bad with Gore or Kerry).

              1. Or, we could vote for the shittier piece of shit, in hopes that eventually even the moderate statists will get so fed up that they’ll overcorrect for liberty. Or at least that the system will collapse under the weight of its own idiocy, and we can laugh at them from whatever country we fled to.

          4. If libertarians refuse to vote, that means the statists and idiots get to choose what govt you have to live under.

            If libertarians vote, that means the statists and idiots get to choose what govt you have to live under, and you get picked for jury duty.

      2. So what does a classic liberal do?

        Invent a time machine, go back to ~1890 (so that hopefully you’re about ready to buy a plot by the time the New Deal comes around), take a list of sports outcomes and stock market quotes so that you can get rich easily, sit back and enjoy the rest of your life.

        Duh.

        Oh, and bring a stock of penicillin…you may need it.

        1. Yeah, I like that (1700’s)

          Pocahontas and a few Neil Young tunes – they were the real libertarians.

          Yes – good!

        2. As long as I can take a stash of MP3 players with my Maiden and some solar chargers, I’m down.

          I envision a scenario in which my selling of all my stock just before the Crash in 1929 is what causes the Crash.

    2. After reading the comments that was my reaction also. If this had been posted at Common Dreams or Huffy I imagine the reactions would be much more what we expected.

  7. “As someone and commented widely and generally sympathetically about Ron Paul, I’ve got to say that The New Republic article detailing tons of racist and homophobic comments from Paul newsletters is really stunning. As former reason intern Dan Koffler documents here, there is no shortage of truly odious material that is simply jaw-dropping.
    I don’t think that Ron Paul wrote this stuff but that really doesn’t matter–the newsletters carried his name after all–and his non-response to Dave Weigel below is unsatisfying on about a thousand different levels. It is hugely disappointing that he produced a cache of such garbage.”–Nick Gillespie

    1. I’m not sure you get. Nobody here gives a flying fuck about Ron Paul specifically. At all. If some guy named Mahmoud Muhammad al-Hassiri idbn Alhan III and happened to be a true republican/constitutionalist/libertarian, we’d support him. Paul just happens to be the best combination of positions and electoral viability at this point.

  8. 3. Enable State Extremism:

    Racism returns with federalism.

    4. Protect Sexual Predators’ Privacy

    We have a long history of institutions which report citizen activities to the government. Omlettes, breaking eggs etc.

    7. Let the Oldest Profession Be:

    “Sex worker” only goes so far. In the end, they’re all victims of the paternal state.

    8. Legalize All Drugs:

    Nice try. Violates our entire neo-progressive public health-centric philosophy which simply states: “what you put in your body IS the business of the state. See: externalities”.

    No can do.

  9. *appeared and happened to be a true…

  10. “Has Paul really disassociated himself from, and “taken moral responsibility” for, these “Ron Paul” newsletters “for over a decade”? If he has, that history has not been recorded by the Nexis database, as best as I can reckon.” –Matt Welch

    1. Pretty sure I cleared this up a few posts up. And you still didn’t answer my question from yesterday – are you a hardcore liberal?

      1. No, he’s a MOROM.

      2. Max is a hardcore mom fucker.

        Please don’t feed it.

        1. Edward is Max Hardcore? It figures.

        2. THE URKOBOLD IS FAMILIAR WITH EDWARD’S WORK. THE TERM HE USED ABOVE, “MOROM,” IS A DISTORTION OF A PHRASE HE COMMONLY USES, “MORE MOM.”

          1. …and the circle is completed…

            ^^FTW^^

          2. Once again, the Urkobold dispenses wisdom to us, such as the wisdom of changing your web site’s background to not be black any more.

            1. Actually, He threatened to rip my taint through my brain stem if I didn’t restore the site to the old format. I just had IT set His monitor settings to a negative image. No complaints so far.

            2. Also

              RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!!!!1one!!1!!

          3. If I was drinking coffee, it would have shot out my nose….and ass.

        3. I believe motherfuckinger is the new clinical term as decided by the council of H&R

          1. SECOND! Discussion?

          2. Isn’t that Austrian or something?

          3. OK, but I get to be the motherfuckingest.

            1. That’s a town outside of Vienna.

          4. Don’t be a MOROM, Sudden.

          5. Whatever happened to using “Bayesque”?

            1. Bayesque is a lower level of Gehenna

      3. You didn’t clear anythning up, asshole.

        1. ARF! BARK! YIP! SNAP! NIP!

  11. Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom?

    Barely. Barely.

    1. Back when the left was us you mean? Like in the late 1700s?

      1. In fairness, when i was a kid, I remember all the liberals in my circle saying the following:

        “Banning any speech is dangerous. Who in the government will decide what speech is obscene and what speech isn’t?”

        “What you put into your body is your business!”

        “We’re not the world’s cop!” –lulz

        And many, many more.

        Fuck, I remember liberals bitching about anti-smoking laws. Liberals.. anti-smoking!!! The mind reels.

        1. Shit, yeah. That was back when I was smoking pot. IOW, when I was a kid.

          Man, that was a long time ago…

        2. Paul — You and I were basically born on the same date or something, right? Of everyone here, your cultural experience/memory tacks closest to mine. Hope that doesn’t ruin your day!

          1. It’s funny because we’re old….

        3. “The old-line Marxists used to claim that a single modern factory could produce enough shoes to provide for the whole population of the world and that nothing but capitalism prevented it. When they discovered the facts of reality involved, they declared that going barefoot is superior to wearing shoes.” –Ayn Rand

          1. Huh. That reminds me of the (Lew Rockwell?) quote about how when the greens realized that poverty was the result of their ideology, they just made poverty their goal.

            1. Essentially the point of Rand’s quote.

            2. Makes sense. That’s why I made exterminating the poor my goal.

  12. 15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.

    It must have been too hard for Mother Jones to look up his comments on the matter, when he said that Congress has no authority to appropriate funds for such frivolities. Unless Mother Jones is pushing some sort of agenda…no, that’s just a conservative meme.

    1. A better argument would be to ask what she did to deserve the medal in the first place. I can’t think of anything.

    2. Or the Mother Jones geniuses could watch the Bullshit episode on Mother Teresa and point out that she was a sadistic bitch. Thinking outside the TEAM box is so hard, though!

      1. Pro Libertate|3.3.06 @ 6:06PM|#

        Codename: Terri. Using sexual wiles and the garrote, “Terri” was one of the CIA’s most powerful assets in the 1980s. Reputed to have convinced Mikhail Gorbachev to embrace capitalism after one night at his dacha. Also believed to have captured and enslaved “Carlos”, the infamous assassin.

        Current whereabouts unknown.

        1. So, not rectal, right?

          1. I don’t think so, but I don’t have access to CIA files.

            1. You know who else didn’t have access to CIA files….

              1. You poor, na?ve fool. Who do you think backed Hitler in the first place?

                1. Your mom?

                  1. Epi has one correct answer

                    1. The “your mom” was an answer to both of the questions.

                    2. In the sense that the CIA bred me in a cloning vat, you are correct.

                2. Michael Bay?

            2. Terri Hatcher?

    3. This is a load of bullshit. All these cases in which Paul voted against some symbolic gesture, he also suggested in session that members of Congress donate their own personal money to such causes, and has said he would be willing to donate his own personal money to such causes. He is always flatly refused.

      1. Good move, but he was just copying Davy Crockett.

    4. I thought that was Rosa Parks? If MJ was out to hatchet RP I would have thought they’d use that example instead.

      (of course he did suggest that each member of Congress pony up $500 to pay for the medal instead, but we know how that works)

      1. Uh, wait, it was more like $75. Point stands.

    5. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal

      Talk about dissing: Congress didn’t even consider giving me the Congressional Gold Medal.

      Seriously, what Warty and Joe M said.

      1. Congressional Gold Medal. Isn’t that some sort of flour?

    6. I wonder how much it costs just to vote on a bill like that. Staffers and printing costs and everything. The $30k for the actual medal might be cheaper than the authorization for it.

  13. I just saw Newcular Titties, Catcher’s Mitt and Good n Pawlenty on TEEVEE, and I reached for my gun, involuntarily.

    Is it too early to be suicidal about the 2012 presidential race? Or should I just wait for the Mayan-calendar thing to happen and not waste the ammo, just in case?

    1. Look, if you’re gonna be suicidal, at least try and take one of the fuckers making you suicidal out with you.

      Metaphorically speaking, of course.

  14. I love the “Rescind bin Laden Raid” title. It’s not enough to point out that Paul took the (extremely unpopular) position that the raid should have been coordinated with Pakistan (a questionable position, IMO). Mommy-State Jones has got to dress it up with some booga-booga and imply that Ron Paul wants to invent a time machine or back-to-life potion to BRING BIN LADEN BACK. Jesus.

  15. This may be even worse:
    http://motherjones.com/politic…..ind-wtf-44

    Look at the effort that a MoJo senior editor — not intern, senior editor — put into tracking down the owner of a possibly-anti-Obama license plate. What a useless fucking rag.

    1. ….bit of mind-numbing insanity on the Libyan war:

      “In case it wasn’t already clear, the Western coalition is now providing close air support to one side in a civil war. I’m OK with that ? though I’d be more OK if I knew more about the rebels we were supporting ? ….”

      http://motherjones.com/kevin-d…..-war-libya

      1. I’m sure his main concern is that they know the proper use of color in decorating their buildings.

  16. Anyone else up for some pharmaceuticals? I thought about Jager, but I think I’m just gonna do a bunch of prescription opiates.

    Wait – opiates, THEN some Jager shots! Who’s in?

    1. If you have some hydro or oxycodone, I’m in. Where are you?

      1. Ohio, in an undisclosed location. But I’m pretty sure I’m really close to Warty, cause the women are quakin’….

        1. Whatever, dude. I’m not giving you mouth-to-mouth when the pills paralyze your diaphragm.

      2. And I only have two percosets left (broken bone a while back) – the rest is a little less….potent.

        1. Any coke?

    2. OK, self – two down the hatch. Run to Wal Mart QUICK before they kick in – need a couple things, plus it will piss off all the slavers.

      Everyone have a good evening! Even Maxipad! And Max’s Mom!

      1. You have an hour, dude. Just make sure you get some quality booze and some smokes.

        1. Turn in your goddamn monocle.

          Everyone here knows that percs take all of 14.5 min to kick in. Almanian is probably dead on the road right now from listening to you.(or he’s walking around walmart right now with a grin on his face, which is pc in most states)

        2. Episiarch|5.16.11 @ 7:21PM|#
          “…and some smokes.”

          Not in the liberal bastion of San Francisco you won’t!

          1. You can easily get smokes there, as long as they’re not tobacco or cloves.

  17. “Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom? Yeah, it’s getting hard to.”

    No. And you’re a fool for “remembering” it.

  18. “Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.” – Ron Paul, 1992

    1. MOROM

  19. Point of interest to Mother Jones:
    Prostitution is legal on the federal level. It is however illegal in every state except for Nevada.

    1. So national parks have legal prostitution?

      1. As long as you’re not too picky about the amount of fur on the prostitute.

        1. Now that was what I call a fox!

    2. Tell that to Eliot Spitzer.

  20. “If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.” – Ron Paul, 1992

    1. “If you have ever been robbed of valuable life by reading a Max comment, you know how unbelievably dimwitted he can be.” – a, now and forever

    2. Max|5.16.11 @ 7:29PM|#
      “If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.” – Ron Paul, 1992″

      You’ve been saving those for years; you must be terrified of the man.

      1. If you’ve ever been disrobed by a 76-year-old libertarian obstetrician, you know how unbelievabley horny they can be.

    3. Is this one of those quotes from a newsletter article that was not written by him and that was published when he wasn’t even running the publication?

      1. The people who were publishing it were paying him a pretty penny for the use of his name.

        At the very least it shows poor judgement that he wasn’t keeping tabs on what they were writing in his name. I hope it’s not a case that he tolerated it because he needed the money.

  21. http://evilqueen.demesnes.net/…..h-society/

    Asked about the John Birch Society Society, Paul responds, “Is that BAD? I have a lot of friends in the John Birch Society. They’re generally well-educated and they understand the Constitution. I don’t know how many positions they would have that I don’t agree with.”

    1. Cut them some slack; they’re only working with the aliens in order to buy enough time to try and develope a vaccine for the black ooze.

      1. Jim, do you think that the MOROM is a Michael Bay fan? I’d bet on it.

        1. Actually no, and here’s why:

          If two forces of such colossal stupidity were ever present in the same place at the same time, the anti-singularity would take place, effectively ending life as we know it in the universe, creating random black holes, tearing the fabric of reality, etc.

          The fact that I’m still here tells me that the Morom has never turned it’s calculating, reptillian mind towards contemplating the Greater Mysteries of Bay.

          1. You’re right, he’s probably just a Scientologist.

            1. zing!

              In all seriousness, we (by which I mean by wife) has a cat named Lord Xenu.

              1. What’s his e-meter reading? I bet it’s off the charts.

                1. Maybe we should be nice to him, so we can get some choice autographs. Or do Cruise & Travolta still charge co-cultists for those, just like they charge to “advance” through their “religion”?

          2. So what you’re saying is that if MOROM ever wants to watch a Michael Bay film, he is only allowed to do so in a large circle deep underneath Switzerland?

            LHC < MOROM + Bayesque

            1. That’s it; I’m commenting as “Bayesque” from now on. It’s just too good to pass up (since I didn’t get proegg antichicken).

    2. So, Max, you’re saying that being well-educated and understanding and wanting to follow the Constitution is a bad thing?

  22. This is clearly a movement I can get behind and on top off or underneath.

  23. That dumb, cock-sucking fuck Pawlenty called Paul by his first name, in the most condescending manner, too (first debate). Useless sack of rabbit shit.

    1. Yeah, he should have called Mr. Racist Scum.

      1. “MOROM!!!1!!1!!!” Max shouted, unable to mouth both words independently as his mouth was firmly affixed to the teet that has provided him the only nourishment he has ever, or will ever know.

        1. Max is Robert “Sweetrobin” Arryn? This explains much.

  24. This is the first time I have heard of “Mother Jones”, but the name is good indicator what they are about.

    Oh and Shrike, please stop pretending you are a Hayek follower, you are not. Supporting government bailouts, welfare states, government control of money etc. is not what he supported. You are nothing but a lunatic who thinks because he had shitty childhood gives him the right to be an arsehole.

  25. The author isn’t passing value judgments on Paul’s positions, he’s merely iterating what will likely be major sticking points for voters. He calls those positions “politically dicey.”

    He’s right…the voters are just that ignorant.

    Contrast with the Mother Jones author who says “nutball libertarian Ron Paul.”

    1. In the same way I can be accused of bias when I describe dumb shit fascist fuck nanny-state asshole Mother Jones writers.

      1. Here, have 10 internets.

        1. Thank you! I need to utlize them now, lest netflation devalue them in the near future.

  26. I like how ball-gobbler Santorum thinks the federal government has the authority to declare official languages. What a fucking piece of horsecrap.

    1. At least Santorum’s not bag of Birchite shit and racist cock sucker like that tiresome of fuck Ron Paul

      1. Has been argued before. Tired. Will sum up fast:

        1) Nothing wrong with being Bircher.

        2) Not racist.

        3) Being old means nothing.

        Santorum is a neo-conservative professional politician – he oozes lies and deceit and insincerity and crookedness. Fucking unbelievable.

        1. Has been argued before. Tired. Will sum up fast:

          +1 for the Rorschach speaking method.

        2. 1. Birchers are conspiracy nuts and way out of the mainstream (Ron Paul is running for President, idiot)
          2. Ron Paul published a racist, homphobic newsletter with his fucking name on it for years. You might give him a pass, but the media won’t.
          3. Most people find boring old fucks repulsive.

          1. Max|5.16.11 @ 9:08PM|#
            “3. Most people find boring old fucks repulsive.”

            Most people find shitheads repulsive too, shithead.

          2. 1) I’ve been visiting the John Birch Society’s website every few days for the last three years. They’re mostly constitutionalists who are also religious. That’s literally IT.

            Yeah, I’m an atheist, so the socially conservative advocacy really doesn’t appeal to me, but I’ve yet to see a conspiracy nut there.

            2) That means absolutely nothing.

            3)Boring old fucks with a little principle and some morally justifiable positions are immeasurably better than unprincipled spin-doctors and walking bullshit refineries.

            1. You are unvelievably stupid.

              1. Max|5.16.11 @ 10:16PM|#
                “You are unvelievably stupid.”

                TOO perfect! Gotta be a spoof!

            2. The JBS do have their conspiracy theories, particularly around communism.

              They believe that the Russians are only pretending to go capitalist to ultimately impose communism worldwide.

              And that the shoot down of KAL 007 was conspiracy to get Lawrence MacDonald.

          3. Wow, I didn’t know I was an ageist.

        3. In fact, his name actually means oozing lies, deceit, insincerity, crookedness, (as well as male semen and the byproduct of a low fiber diet that has been repeatedly hammer by the length of another man) out of one’s rectal cavity.

          1. and worse than that; Santorum is an absolute bore.

            1. Tell me about it. Dead fish, when what I really need is a power bottom.

          2. Oh, that’s what my girlfriend was referring to. Makes sense now.

  27. Holy shit. They actually asked Paul this –

    “Do you really think prostitution and use of heroin are exercises in liberty?”

    What the fuck is wrong with these asshats?

  28. “4. Protect Sexual Predators’ Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.”

    Wifi operators? That’s just about everyone who has purchased a computer, electronic game player, or a cellular phone in the last five years.

    Paul voted against this? The bastard.

    1. He would probably vote against reporting suspected transmissions, too. No wonder we are engulfed by evil.

  29. Don’t you wonder what is would be like to have a viable libertarian leaning candidate?

    1. Let me answer that question by posing another.

      Don’t you wonder what it would be like to have a square circle?

    2. Do you wonder what it would be like to be a prison guard in North Korea and do you masturbate to this fantasy?

    3. Max|5.16.11 @ 10:17PM|#
      “Don’t you wonder what is would be like to have a viable libertarian leaning candidate?”

      Well, one fact is obvious; you’d be scared shitless.

  30. False issues at Mother Jones.

    It’s the ecomomy morom.

  31. You fucking Ron Paul supporters have got to be the stupidist fucks on the planet. But, hey, you’re happy. Don’t be too disappointed in the outcome, morons.

    1. Summary:

      1) Nobody cares about Ron Paul specifically. We care about the guy with the best balance of principles and electoral viability. Pretty sure I cleared that up.

      2) Nobody here’s under any delusions, and I don’t remember anybody exaggerating Paul’s chances.

      3) You’re a liberal. Go fucking die in a pit.

    2. No doubt you support some “serious” candidate like Caribou Barbie, or maybe you’ll vote Urkel another four years.

      1. Not fair Sandwhich…there is also Crazy eyes Bachmann to consider.

  32. I love telling my pro-choice friends how I fully support 100% legal prostitution. The simple extension of the “my body my choice” logic to a woman’s right to charge admittance into orifices blows a fuse in their brain.

  33. All for one, one for all.

  34. If it was an article in Extreme Skateboarding, then maybe one might deduce that “extreme” was being used as a compliment.If I was drinking coffee, it would have shot out my nose….and ass.

  35. So much for the myth that the Democratic and Republican parties are different.

    1. I second that comment

  36. This is the worst chat room ever.

    1. a/s/l?

  37. Mother Jones is two-faced. Who knew?

  38. “As someone and commented widely and generally sympathetically about Ron Paul, I’ve got to say that The New Republic article detailing tons of racist and homophobic comments from Paul newsletters is really stunning. As former reason intern Dan Koffler documents here, there is no shortage of truly odious material that is simply jaw-dropping.
    I don’t think that Ron Paul wrote this stuff but that really doesn’t matter–the newsletters carried his name after all–and his non-response to Dave Weigel below is unsatisfying on about a thousand different levels. It is hugely disappointing that he produced a cache of such garbage.”–Nick Gillespie

    1. I have that quandry with Paul as well…however, a person can change, after all Byrd wasn’t defined by his KKK past.

  39. Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom?

    No and that’s because it never was.

  40. I agree with almost all of Paul’s views on the federal government. He rightly wants freedom when it comes to the federal government, but then he blows it because he thinks a police state is permissible if it is state-run.

  41. Mr. Ron Paul for 2012 Republican Nom and President.
    -Strengthen our USD
    -No Inflation
    -Balance the Budget
    -No Mandated Healthcare
    -Creates MANY JOBS
    -New Crop Industries
    -Free Market
    -Very Pro Life
    -No Bailout
    -No Patriot Act
    -Stays out of foreign DOMESTIC AFFAIRS, but contract/trade with all
    -No Unjustified War with no objectives
    -Brings our Troops Home after over 10 YEARS OF FIGHTING!!!!
    The US could have fought WWII twice in 10 Years!
    TROOPS HOME NOW!

    Thank You
    Mr. Ron Paul 2012

  42. This article is completely wrong about Ron Paul. He is by no means pro drugs or prostitution. What he says is that if the people vote and agree it should be legal, it should be. He believes in states rights and individual freedoms, defined by the constitution. Freedom and individual liberty is a full package, so you can’t pick and choose how to control peoples lives. Do research before you blindly call someone a moron when the article clearly has an agenda.

  43. “Remember when the Left was anti-authoritarian, anti-prude, and pro-personal freedom? Yeah, it’s getting hard to.” Very true…Though in the same vein Republicans exploit Libertarians with all of their “small government” rhetoric as well…I do think Congressman Paul best represents the Libertarian view, though I would not follow him blindly either. I am not sure on how much power he would allow state government to infringe on individual rights…

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.