Politics

Ron Paul: Eat, Drink, Smoke Whatever You Want

|

Via the Washington Examiner's Charlie Spiering, an account of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) talking to college kids:

Surrounded by over 1000 University of Iowa students, Ron Paul gave a barn-burning speech on personal liberty that resonated with the college crowd.

"We need a new generation that cares about the rule of law and the constitution." Paul declared to heavy applause.

Paul encouraged the students to use their personal liberty for "excellence and virtue," but asserted that liberty granted them the right to do as they pleased.

"If your spiritual life, which is a serious responsibility, and your intellectual life is a serious responsibility, why is it that we assume you can have free decisions there, why shouldn't you have free decisions on what you eat, drink, smoke and put into your own body?" he asked, followed by a roar of approval.

More here.

Hat tip: Twitter feed of the great Jim Harper.

Bonus Paul statement: Face the Nation asks former Sen. Rick Santorum and GOP presidential candidate how he would react to his competitors getting the party's nod: "Ron Paul would give me a little indigestion, I'd have to take antacids on foreign policy."

Reason on Ron Paul.

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.

149 responses to “Ron Paul: Eat, Drink, Smoke Whatever You Want

  1. “If your spiritual life, which is a serious responsibility, and your intellectual life is a serious responsibility, why is it that we assume you can have free decisions there, why shouldn’t you have free decisions on what you eat, drink, smoke and put into your own body?”

    Because neither of the first two should be free either, hence govt schools and politicians pandering to ministers to make them arms of their campaigns.

    1. A wish list:

      Separation of education and state.
      Separation of transportation and state.
      Separation of sex and state.
      Separation of employment and state.

      Additions?

      1. Separation of me and state

        1. Enjoy.

          REGULATION VACATION CELEBRATION!
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0

          Lest we be accused of misrepresenting their views, actual Libertarians have been kicking around this take on Somalia with a straight face for some time now. No shit: mises.org/story/2066

          A more nuanced completely insane view is that Somalia has been awesome-ized by Anarchism, not Libertarianism. reason.com/blog/show/117519.html

          1. Life in Somalia was so great when they still had a government, oh wait…

            1. Somalia still has a government, just one run by petty warlords instead of petty bureaucrats.

      2. De-regulate the Land, erase the artificial lines drawn upon the face of Mother Earth to restrict the free movement of people.

        Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

        1. …to protect artificial lines on the earth that restrict free movement of people my rights!

        2. Well, we seem to have at least achieved separation of sanity and White Indian.

          1. …like RC DEAN, calling for de-regulation is “insane.”

            Because Libertarian Statists do Soviet Psychiatric diagnoses on anti-state dissent so much better.

            LOLOLOLOL

            1. There it goes with the “mother earth” bullshit again, too.

              The earth is not a living creature. It’s a rock with water and stuff on it. Nothing more.

              1. Stupid is as stupid does. If the earth were not “living”, YOU would be dead…..and not just brain dead….

          2. Well, we seem to have at least achieved separation of sanity and White Indian.

            That presumes that they were at some point united.

            I see no evidence of this.

            Officer, am I free to post this comment?

            1. No, you are not free to comment!

              Instead I’m free to toss you out of your chair and cause you to bang your head against your keyboard!

              And Dunphy will be free to make excuses about how we just don’t have the evidence to try me for assault and battery!

              1. And charge me with resisting arrest lol

        3. Oh, and pixelated diarrhea, banhammer, etc.

          1. …like RC DEAN, calling for de-regulation of a big government enTitlement program needs the “banhammer.”

            LOLOLOLOL

        4. Free movement of people and removing government restrictions on travel is a great idea.

          Your idea of entirely erasing the existence of all property lines, however, is the most statist thing of all.

          It would lead to the withering of the state just as much as Communism did; i.e., not at all.

          Erasing property lines would lead to much more heavy handed government control of land than currently, out of a desire to deal with the tragedy of the commons.

          1. Actually, Native Americans have historically believed that NO ONE can own the land – that the land is here for ALL PEOPLE to enjoy – but that with that comes the responsibility to be GOOD STEWARDS of the land. In other words, don’t use it up, don’t abuse it.

            From a Christian pov, erasing boundary lines leads to one-world-government, which if you believe the prophecies, would also pave the way for the Anti-Christ’s absolute control…..

            1. What a load of bullshit. That is just revisionist history. Actual anthropoligcal evidence showed that Native Indians were just as territorial as the evil White man, people need to remember machivellian politicking of the Iroqoius Confederacy. Just because human beings wear animal furs and smoke pipes doesn’t somehow make them more intune with fucking mother earth and less warlike. The entire history of human nature shows that as one big falsehood.

              1. The only other difference betwen the white man, and which should also include arabs and asians, from the indians and aborigine, or modern man and neolithic man, is that they put their claims onto fucking paper. That’s it. I’m sure the Natives and prehistoric man used some sort of stone configuration to indicate “Hey asshat this is my turf.”

                1. exactly. humans in general are territorial, regardless of race.

        5. If you want to gambol, go to Las Vegas.

      3. Separation of economy and state.

        1. Or do you support deregulating the Land, erase the artificial lines drawn upon the face of Mother Earth to restrict the free movement of people?

          Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

          1. I see the library continues to allow homeless schizos to use their computers.

            1. …but can’t address it, so he calls names. It’s the primary libertarian method of argument.

              The whole of Libertarianism is exposing government force when convenient, and whitewashing aggression when it is profitable to the libertarian.

              Libertarianism is government for me, but not for thee.

              1. I’ve got a pickle stuck in my cunt!

                1. Wait, let me check. No, that’s not a pickle. Those are maggots. My mistake!

                2. That’s funny. I have a cunt stuck on my pickle.

              2. Tell me something, lets say you have your primitivist society, and you are staying in a hut. Now I come along and shit right outside the entrance to your hut, since I have free movement I can go where I want. I can even enter you hut and sleep in your bed, since the bed is not yours and I can go where I want.

                1. …gets Non-State society all wrong. But Statists have to make up bullshit to make Non-State society look bad.

                  NON-STATE AND STATE SOCIETIES
                  http://faculty.smu.edu/rkemper…..ieties.pdf

                  1. Either admit that you agree with the annexation of land for private use or agree that NotSure can shit in your bed, or point out a third option. Nothing in that link you posted addresses NotSure’s point.

                    1. One can always hope for civility, decorum, and respect for the rights of others. In other words, THE GOLDEN RULE: DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU. Hobbes, of course, would agree with you and state that man would indeed shit outside your door and sleep in your bed. Locke would argue that all things being equal – i.e., everyone has their own hut, their own bed, and their own hole to shit in – we could all peacefully co-exist.

                    2. Shit in the doorway, not bed.

                2. This question is relevent to our interests.

              3. I think “sarcasmic loves gov’t force” is confusing “libertarianism” with “Republicans.” Unfortunately, so do a lot of other people, who claim to be “libertarian.” Glenn Beck, I’m looking at you…

                1. Guess you’ve been given the doorway-shitting green light, NS.

              4. No. Trying to create some sort of tue anarchic fantasy indian pipe smoking society is goverment for me not for thee because then my access to stuff and land would be restricted to what I can access. Don’t believe me, look at chimpanzees, we have observed them engaging in turf wars with rival groups. They have no tools, no formal concept of the state, yet they still have the conept of territory. So do lions, tigers and bears oh my. Books how does that fucking work!

            2. like you?

      4. I’ll add a weekend road trip in pursuit of happiness.

      5. Separation of healthcare and the state.
        Separation of housing and the state.

      6. Commerce/Economy.

      7. Law needs to be common law #1,

      8. separation of religion and state…something far too many politicians ignore, much to the delight of the fanatic religious right.

      9. Separation of money and state – no more political contributions for elections/campaigns! No more lobbyists!

    2. Does Ron Paul support de-regulation of the Land?

      Or does he support heavy regulation of the Land with lines drawn upon Mother Earth to restrict the free movement of people to gather and hunt?

      Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

      1. he believes in porperty rights, all animals are territorial, whats so bad about ensuring that is proctected by the gov considering thats one of the few things they are allowed to do, protect our rights.

        1. Ever see a squirrel or dolphin or crow claim ownership of a vast tract of territory and then charge other animals rent to be able to live upon the earth?

          The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not anyone have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, “Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.” ~Jean Jacques Rousseau, A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality

          1. “Ever see a squirrel claim ownership of territory?”

            Yes.

            1. No.

              “The free market means that those without money to buy what they need do not have the right to live.” ~John McMurtry

              1. Negative Ghostrider. A free market means those who refuse to devise means of gaining money cannot participate in the system. You’re still free to eat a squirrel.

                1. Does that go for children, especially orphans? The disabled? The elderly? Let’s see, if they don’t work, they don’t have the right to eat…. But government says we can’t kill them, so what do we do? Oh yeah, just deny them shelter, utilities, food and clothing….eventually they’ll freeze or starve. Problem solved! Right?

                  1. Do not confuse charity for government. Who in their right mind would entrust the neediest of people to a ruthless bureaucracy? That is why we have charitable organizations.

                    In a truly free society the needy would be cared for by those who actually DO care about them. Not some F-ing bureaucrat who sees them as an excuse for his free riding.

                    If you have a two coats and your neighbor has none…. I guess you would hire a thug to steal a coat from your neighbor with 3 and count yourself “charitable”.

          2. I saw a raccoon beat the crap of another raccoon last night in defense of his territory. It’s like the raccoons understand that private property doesn’t require a state and are therefore smarter than white Indian.

              1. “Beat the crap of” does have a nice ring to it…

            1. But have you ever seen a dolphin beat the crap out of a raccoon in defense of vast tracts of land?

          3. From my understanding all those named animals are territorial. If they had limited government to protect their property rights I’m sure they would charge rent.

          4. Yes they do it all the fucking time. Except rather than go to court they fucking kill the trespasser.

  2. “Ron Paul would give me a little indigestion, I’d have to take antacids on foreign policy.”

    Hence the appeal

    1. I wouldn’t say that’s his main appeal for me, but just one more of the layers of flavor in what would be a great rub for barbecuing all the pork that is Washington DC.

    2. If Ron Paul getting the nod means Santorum gets a little indigestion, then i’m hoping for a downright ulcer.

    3. Of course, I’d have to respond that Santorum has left a bad taste in my mouth on several occasions.

      1. Given what “santorum” now means, that’s a pretty gross statement you just made.

        1. That’s the joke.

    4. So the fecal content of his santorum would increase?

  3. THIS MUST BE THE RESULT OF SOME OF THAT “SMART DIPLOMACY” WE WERE PROMISED: New Libyan Leader To Introduce “Radical” Islamic Law.“Mr Abdul-Jalil’s decision ? made in advance of the introduction of any democratic process ? will please the Islamists who have played a strong role in opposition to Col Gaddafi’s rule and in the uprising but worry the many young liberal Libyans who, while usually observant Muslims, take their political cues from the West.”

    See, I told you guys this would work out just fine!

    1. The sekret mooslim president wins another one.

    2. Yeah, and the situation in Tunisia is a bit disappointing.

      http://www.jpost.com/Features/…..?id=242922

    3. Another secular state well on its way to becoming a hellhole of Islamist infighting. Fuck yeah.

      1. I’m rooting for the Sunnis, uh, Shia, uh, you know, the ones that think the heirs of … the four caliphs …

      2. I’m beyond caring about it anymore. Let them kill each other and themselves.

        On the humorous (maybe sad) side, I saw a flyer at W&M this weekend for a LGBT Muslim gathering. Something tells me they haven’t done a lot of self-education on their religion. Just more proof that people inherit their religion rather than picking it through any form of intellectual endeavor.

        1. You really needed more “proof” of that?

          I thought it plainly obvious to everyone. Even the indoctrinated would have to admit it, especially when asked just how many religions they had given a fair shake at before “choosing” the one they had.

          Choice plays no role in religion for most, and all but the most intellectually dishonest know it.

          1. Choice plays no role in religion for most, and all but the most intellectually dishonest know it.

            Yeah, but there are a lot of athiests here (myself included). Most of us were started out on a religion when we were young. We tend to look at people who don’t look critically at their own religion the same way we look at those who never learned to tie their shoes.

            1. Though not necessarily an atheist, I’d agree with the sentiment.

              I have absolutely rejected institutionalized religion – it and government have been by far the two worst concepts to spring from humanity – though perhaps not some form of spirituality. I guess you could call me agnostic as it seems to me about as uncritical to insist on there being no god(s) as it is to insist that there absolutely is.

              1. Actually that’d make you a weak-atheist(not an insult, actual term). I have no idea whether you’re an agnostic, as that indicates an opinion as to whether man can know the mind of a god, regardless of it’s probability of existence.

          2. Choice plays no role in religion for most, and all but the most intellectually dishonest know it.

            I have two responses to this, but of which reach the same place:

            1. If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice

            2. If you dont make a choice, you dont really have a religion.

    4. Jordan’s king swore in a new government.

      http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEas…..42964&R=R3

  4. Caliphate!!!!

  5. “If your spiritual life, which is a serious responsibility, and your intellectual life is a serious responsibility, why is it that we assume you can have free decisions there, why shouldn’t you have free decisions on what you eat, drink, smoke and put into your own body?”

    Because spiritual and intellectual decisions don’t affect anyone else
    Because spiritual and intellectual decisions are not involved with the economy
    “Fuck you”, that’s why.

  6. Liberals scoff at libertarians, calling us Republicans who smoke pot. However, it’s equally valid to single out our economic policies by calling us Democrats who want to legalize prostitution.

    1. …you’re all agricultural city-Statists who love regulating the land with artificial lines that restrict the free movement of people.

      Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

      1. Yes, you are. Now go.

        1. White Idiot posts, yet again, his anti-property bullshit on a thread which has nothing to do with his pet topic.

          1. How the fuck is someone who doesn’t believe in property or the state even posting on the internet? ethernet-over-smoke signals?

    2. By the way, Taiwan just re-legalized prostitution.

  7. … followed by a roar of approval.

    However, such roars must have political teeth.

    1. Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

      Or do you support aggression against me for crossing lines drawn on the face of Mother Earth to restrict free movement of her people?

      1. Because Libertarians and Republicans don’t really want freedom.

        They support big-government Land enTitlement programs that restrict the free movement of people to forage and hunt and do whatever they want without aggression against them.

        1. Are you familiar with the basic ecomomic principle of scarcity? There isn’t enough for everyone, hence the division. Your position has no logical extension. If there isn’t enough for everyone, who decides who gets what? Human history in a nutshell.

  8. Does that include RU-486 pills?

    1. Yes and no.

    2. …but not for thee.

    3. It’s my biggest problem with RP, but I don’t think he can do much about it, luckily.

    4. Just for rectal

      1. Retroactive, hopefully.

  9. “I don’t believe Representative Ron Paul would be a good president,” he tells Piers Morgan. “If you listen to his position on a lot of things, it’s always, let’s throw out the baby with the bathwater.”

    and

    “Ron Paul would give me a little indigestion, I’d have to take antacids on foreign policy.”

    He keeps racking up those endorsements. I may have to send him more money.

    1. It isn’t antacids that Sanctimonius needs to take – a box of Exlax would do wonders for him. So would pulling the stick out of his ass.

    2. Me too.Remember, if ron paul doesn’t get the nomination this time around, there is always gary johnson in 2016. thats assuming our economy doesn’t crash within the next four years.

  10. I guess expecting more than a week of on time morning links was nothing morning that a crazy dream.

    1. Why bother posting them? It’s just more imaginary lines on a monitor for rather to shit White Indian all over.

      1. I don’t think it’s rather. I don’t think it’s Episiarch either, but his using hypothetical IT magic to avoid banning is the only reason I can see the thing is still around.

        1. I think it’s two different people. Rather is just a blogwhore. WI is mentally unbalanced.

          1. …calling for de-regulation is “mentally unbalanced.”

            Because Libertarian Statists do Soviet Psychiatric diagnoses on anti-state dissent so much better.

            LOLOLOLOL

          2. Didn’t she finally admit to being WI in some weekend thread?

            1. If you’re talking about the austerity thread, I think it may have been a spoof, but the signal to noise ratio was very low.

              1. Spoof or rare moment of sanity? She’s not just a simple blogwhore… remember the lesson of her being banned a few weeks back… she was gone, and, mysteriously, so were all the anono-pussy posts. Hmm… I wonder why that was the case?

                She’s insane. I guess it will take her stabbing someone at a Reason get-together for everyone to finally realize that.

                1. …and the genocide of millions of First Families confirms it.

                  “[The Native Americans] didn’t have any rights to the land and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights … Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to take over this continent.” ~Ayn Rand, speech to the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, March 6, 1974

                  1. It’s arrogant to believe the “first families” started out on this continent.

                    1. plus “millions” is hyperbole, but WI is innumerate so it’ll just keep spouting the same bs.

                    2. I think the term first families is funny. Its like a tolkenian first men kind phrase. As if white families suddenly sprang out of the grand after native familys.

          3. A glance at rectal’s blog tells you all you need to know about her mental balance. She’s White Indian, dude.

            1. And look at this sub-thread here… White Indian jumping to the defense of the nutbag pulling “his” strings.

              1. I’m not convinced it’s rectal either, but I do know it should be banned.

                1. I’m not an “it,” just because I’m calling for deregulation of a big-government Land enTitlement program.

                  Do you believe in human rights, or not? If so, act like it.

                  1. What is the header at the top of this thread, WI?

                    Why, lookee here! It’s about Ron Paul talking about food, drink, and smoking! Which has FUCK-ALL to do with your bullshit land-ownership theory.

                    Gosh, ain’t that a bitch.

                    1. For being my perfect foil. Foul mouthed. Mean spirited. Name calling.

                      It’s all ya got. Keep putting ‘er out there for everybody to observe.

                      ~Yours truly,
                      White Indian

                      P.S. Would you like compensated for your work?

                    2. I do this for free.

                      Way to tapdance around the “you’re posting shit that has nothing to do with Ron Paul’s opinions on food, smoke, and drink”, though.

                2. I’m not convinced it’s rectal either, but I do know it should be banned

                  Nahh! It’s funny…and it shows surprising stamina…even for someone so wonderfully loopy!

            2. You actually clicked her blog link? SMH.

              1. “I’m calling for deregulation of a big-government Land enTitlement program.”

                How do you propose people live, in your fantasy world? Six billion people, shitting wherever they want because they claim whatever piece of property they happen to inhabit at any given moment, would be the least of the problems your “cure” would present.

                Seriously… you haven’t thought this out, have you?

                1. Seriously… you haven’t thought this out, have you?

                  I haven’t had a coherent thought in years! LOLOLOLGAMBOLOLOL!

      2. Oh no, she’s got to you too. We’re doomed.

      3. …calling for de-regulation is “shit.”

        LOLOLOLOL

      4. I think this may be the point of the posting at all.

        Not to convince us that gamboling through the forest is idyllic, but by annoying some posters so much that some stop coming here and weakening the discussions.

        I’d say it’s working too.

        It would seem to me that steadfast ignorance of it under all circumstances is the only way to deal with it.

        1. …is weakening the discussions to “mad libertarian guy.”

          LOLOLOLOLOLOL

          1. C’mon….call him a poodle! Isn’t that what the voices are telling you to do?

            1. Isn’t that what the voices are telling you to do?

              They make pills for that, but I don’t take ’em!

              GAMBOLOLOLOLOL!

  11. “If you listen to his position on a lot of things, it’s always, let’s throw out the baby with the bathwater.”

    Someone should tell Santorum it’s not a baby.
    Someone took a shit in the bathtub and yes, Ron Paul wants to throw it out along with the bathwater.

  12. “I’ve got a pickle stuck in my cunt!”

  13. Don’t Drink, Don’t Smoke, What do you do?

  14. “Eat, Drink, Smoke Whatever You Want”

    That is a horrible paraphrase. Paraphrases like that give small government advocates a bad name. It confuses not throwing people in jail for smoking stuff with advocating smoking stuff.

    Ron Paul is not encouraging people to go eat, drink, or smoke whatever they want. He is saying they should be personally responsible for what they put in their mouths, negative consequences and all.

    1. exactly. do whatever you want with your body, as long as it doesn’t interfere with anyone else’s liberty

  15. I wonder if he mentioned how he was gonna kill their student loans.

    1. I think you mean taxpayer guaranteed/subsidized student loans. Not the same thing as student loans.

      1. Exactly, they would still be able to get student loans, students got them before the existence of the taxpayer guarantee. Plus, bonus advantage, they would be bankruptible!

  16. I *STRONGLY* believe Ron Paul is electable. He’s ideologically consistent and honest. His “Plan to Restore America “is exactly what this over-extended government needs. Most striking to me is his economic understanding vis-a-vis the Austrian School. This, and this alone, is enough substance for me to vote for him. The Austrian School is incredibly intelligent, and it is the oldest known school of economic thought.

    Here are a few articles I wrote which may be of use:

    1. Top 10 Reasons to Vote for Ron Paul: http://www.blazingtruth.com/vote-ron-paul

    2. Top 5 Reasons Austrian Economics Works: http://www.blazingtruth.com/austrian-economics

    Thank you for your time, and I strongly urge you to vote for Ron Paul in the GOP Primaries.

    – Dave (Author, Blazingtruth.com)

    1. “Ideologically consistent and tough as nails.”
      A rare goodie from SNL. (I’d post a youtube link, but the bastards at NBC Universal had it removed due to copyright)

  17. I suck dicks.

    1. Officer, am I free to huff some jenkem?

      1. Officer, must I swallow?

    2. Officer, am I free to huff some jenkem?

  18. If Santorum doesn’t like it, you know it’s good.

  19. I’ll have to say one thing for the conservatives, their message boards are a lot more fun than the liberals! Liberal message boards demand more civility and don’t let you say words like shit, let alone fuck. The conservatives, even the religious right, don’t care what’s said as long as they agree with it! Fuck yeah! Tee hee hee.

    1. Well, fuck, shit, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. Wait. I’m missing one.

  20. The Reason site, along with Hit&Run;, should close comments on their articles, because the griefer trolls descend at every instance to distract from the subject of the post and fill the comments with worthless crap.

    1. its still light years better than other sites, like youtube or reddit

    2. You don’t have to use code words here. Just use “shit”.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.