MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Rand Paul Getting Attacked Is What’s Wrong with Libertarianism. Wait, What? (UPDATED)

Unprovoked physical assault normally invites sympathy, unless your politics are too weird.

The premise, admittedly, sounds like a Will Ferrell comedy: Politically outspoken middle-aged neighbor physician attacks actual politician middle-aged neighbor physician, but not over politics (reportedly)—over a "landscaping dispute." Though even one cracked rib can hurt like hell, and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) reportedly has five six, sometimes you have to laugh a little:

But if you think a seemingly non-political man-fight would escape the relentless Politicization of Everything, you haven't been paying attention. By dint of his unusual ideology, Rand Paul suffers from the Weird Man's Burden, which means sustaining an unprovoked assault is a splendid occasion to call him an asshole.

"Rand Paul is an asshole neighbor," GQ's Jack Moore asserts, for example, in a post titled "Rand Paul Sounds Like the Worst Guy to Have as a Neighbor." Just how short is that ideological skirt?

He bought a house in a neighborhood that has certain rules with regard to lawns, and he decided that he doesn't need to follow those rules because of his belief in "property rights" that don't actually exist. This is, at its core, the problem with libertarianism. Libertarians don't want to follow the rules that we as a society have agreed upon, because they feel those rules step on their freedoms. And sometimes they might even be right, but that doesn't mean that they are above those rules and can do whatever they want.

Moore hastens to add, "Now, I don't want to excuse the other side of this," so it's totally fine that his takeaway from a senator getting his ribs cracked is that libertarians suck. But really, who doesn't want to punch a libertarian, amirite?

The attack has prompted impressively in-depth reporting on Paul's irritable views toward his local Home Owner Association rules, with asking-for-it newspaper headlines such as, "Rand Paul is not a perfect neighbor, says community developer." But extra credit goes to Detroit Free Press columnist Brian Dickerson, who wrings an entire piece out of the question: What kind of politician mows his own lawn? Sample:

[C]ynicism inclines me toward another explanation, which is that Paul is the sort of fellow who wants to be known as a self-mower, and to be seen driving a John Deere around his own yard.

Mowing one's own lawn is a time-honored way for a well-educated politician to establish his "just folks" bona fides. Former Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis had a Harvard Law School degree, but preferred to be known as a guy who pushed a hand mower around the yard of his modest Brookline home. (That might have been the image that stuck in voters' minds if Dukakis had not carelessly allowed himself to be photographed in a ridiculous tank helmet.)

Piloting a riding mower around a big yard combines the virile self-reliance of mowing with the aspirational elements of horsepower and real estate acquisition.

Some conservative outlets are also criticizing Hamilton Nolan's Splinter piece "Drink More Milk Rand Paul," but I'm a big defender of news-surrealism. Also this, from Trevor Noah, is pretty funny:

Though arguably not as funny as Shepard Smith's aggressive eye-rolling here (with Judge Andrew Napolitano as the straight man):

We will hopefully understand more about this puzzling incident soon. In the meantime, a pledge: If and when Bernie Sanders gets curb-stomped by an irate Burlingtonian, I won't use that as an excuse to talk about the inherently off-putting personal traits of democratic socialists. Besides, he was already kicked out of the commune….

UPDATE: Over at Above the Law, Elie Mystal writes a piece with the subhed: "Rand Paul received the kind of justice that makes libertarianism unworkable." Come again?

The thing everybody knows about Rand Paul is that he's a libertarian and "libertarian" always sounds like a fine legal and political theory to people who haven't thought deeply about how to live with others.

"You can do what you want and I can do what I want and, so long as we're not hurting anybody, the government can do nothing." It's… cute, as theories of social interactions go. It's not a workable basis for law and governance.

Rand Paul's broken ribs prove the weakness of libertarianism. According to reports, Rand Paul likes to grow pumpkins on his property. You might like pumpkins, but to some people, pumpkins are kind of big and ugly and, stinky. A slightly past harvest pumpkin patch smells the worst. [...]

Reports also indicate that Paul makes his own compost (also stinky) and "has little interest for neighborhood regulations." This, my friends, is what libertarianism looks like in practice. I'll grow what I want, put trash where I want, and maintain my space however I want, and you can't do anything about it. FREEDOM!

Of course, the neighbors, who in the instant case had to live next to Rand Paul's pumpkin spiced compost heap for 17 years, are left with little recourse. In Libertarian Land, all of the legal regulations that might restrain Paul's behavior do not exist. They don't believe in "zoning." They don't care about your sightlines. Libertarians expect an easement in gross over your entire freaking property so long as their behavior is technically limited to their parcel of land. [...]

Yes, I'm victim-blaming. Yes, I'm saying Rand Paul was "asking for it," over these past 17 years. Yes, I'm talking from a position of strength, and privilege, with a dollop of hypocrisy — as I am confident that none of my white neighbors are going to come at my 300 lbs black ass over the nasty ginko fruits my beautiful tree liberally spreads around the neighborhood.

But Rand Paul's broken ribs are a goddamn case study in why we need regulations.

Photo Credit: Rand Paul's Facebook page

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.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    What kind of politician mows his own lawn?

    the fucking fuck? That makes me want to fucking fistfight that reporter.

  • BYODB||

    It's becoming ever clearer that most news outlets believe that the only good Republican (or Libertarian) is a dead one.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    I think there is still room for reformed deplorables that can be paraded around to bark on command for the amusement of communists.

  • Rhywun||

    Unfortunately, only one of them at a time gets to fill the "token conservative" slot at the NYT.

  • jogibew||

    I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

    This is what I do... www.netcash10.com

  • Citizen X - #6||

    That's why Salon reruns the same "Confessions of a Former Libertarian" article every few months with a different author.

    My favorite one was the guy who decided not to be a libertarian anymore when he realized that libertarianism ruled out forcing other people to conform to his Buddhist beliefs. The whole article could be summed up as "i don't understand libertarianism OR Buddhism at all."

  • Red Tony||

    Isn't Buddhism kinda supportive of the non-aggression principle? At least, I thought something close to it was one of its tenets.

  • Eidde||

    Depends on the Buddhist.

    Some Buddhists aren't big into the whole peace thing.

  • JuanQPublic||

    Buddhism the philosophy is generally live and let live.

    Of course, like any philosophy or religion, it can be warped to suit the crazy.

  • Bubba Jones||

    I think that if a Buddhist beats someone up, that is taken as evidence that the victim deserved it. Because karma.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    I would love to read that. Linky?

  • Citizen X - #6||

  • Earth Skeptic||

    The fuck!

    "But it also sometimes felt bad to be a libertarian. I didn't like that people I cared about regularly thought I was a smug asshole."

    Feels better to be a limp-wrested totalitarian?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    That's a very meaningful statement though, a very real statement. He didn't like that his beliefs disagreed with those around him, it says nothing about the beliefs being correct and everything about his social life. This is very common, social pressure is probably more powerful than anything for inflicting political beliefs upon people.

  • jelabarre||

    "But it also sometimes felt bad to be a libertarian. I didn't like that people I cared about regularly thought I was a smug asshole."

    But I *enjoy* being a smug asshole. Being a Libertarian is just a side-benefit.

  • CE||

    When you're worse than Hitler, it's okay to kill you even when you're a harmless baby.

  • MoreFreedom||

    Shep is certainly anti-libertarian. And he jumped to the conclusion about Rand having disputes with the HOA, for which I've seen no evidence. Paul stated he didn't know the reason for the attack. And Boucher's lawyer won't even say what it's about (probably because he doesn't believe his client).

    Boucher certainly needs some anger management classes, and needs to learn how to verbally assert himself before he goes about assaulting someone which he shouldn't do except in self defense. Frankly, I hope Boucher gets a year or two in jail, because he deserves it.

  • MichaelL||

    Being blindsided and tackled is an excessively aggressive act. It is not like they were arguing and the guy took a swing at Rand. The attacker needs a big enough punishment that he should never consider similar actions in the future.

  • Sevo is my bitch||

    good thing you did not generalize like the ass you are oblivious you are

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Journalism seems to attract people that somehow manage to be even more loathsome than politicians.

  • Red Tony||

    Maybe it's just that the more people spout off about their opinions, the more horrid they appear.

  • Jay Dubya||

    FYI writing smug hit pieces about Rand Paul being mugged isn't journalism. All of the writing quoted in the article above is in incredibly poor taste & says a lot of things about the countries political climate, but opinion columns are not journalism. It's worth saying a third time: a journalist is not someone who bitches about politicians in writing. There's a lot of confusion on this point; quite a bit of that confusion is caused by people who are not journalists claiming to be journalists. For example, there is television, which has convinced millions of people that journalism is what Bill OReilly or Rachel Maddow does. Its not. Finally, not everything in a newspaper is journalism. Your average newspaper contains a crossword puzzle, word jumble, comic strips, classified ads, etc. None of those things are journalism. Similarly newspapers also publish commentary in the form of editorials, opeds, columnists & criticism. When Dan Savage makes lewd jokes about the mechanics of gay sex, it is not journalism, even if it is published in a weekly news magazine. As a result it's fair to criticize Dan Savage & say he is not funny or question the judgement of a periodical that publishes Savage, but claiming that Dan Savage is a *journalist* & that criticism of him or his writing is in fact criticism of journalism is factually wrong. tl;Dr - the people writing this trash about Rand aren't journalists.

  • Otis B. Driftwood||

    +1

  • Fred Zuccini||

    The kind that isn't a fucking metrosexual like GQ writers.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    FFS, some people just enjoy mowing their own yard, and don't want anyone else to do it for them. There was a whole 'King of the Hill' episode where the plot was Hank getting into a feud with the Canadian couple renting Boomhauer's house because Hank was designated to mow his lawn for him while he was gone and the Canadian guy starts mowing it on his own.

    Also, who gives a fuck what some faggoty progtard from GQ thinks?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Also this, from Trevor Noah, is pretty funny:

    Hey, there's a first time for everything!

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Tony losing his virginity?

  • damikesc||

    Exception that proves the rule there.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Nonconsensual intercourse with sheep doesn't count.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    What if he gets that whole written consent thing first?

  • DRM||

    How's the sheep going to get Tony to write his consent?

  • Palatki||

    Tony is still a virgin, between his ears.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Mowing one's own lawn is a time-honored way for a well-educated politician to establish his "just folks" bona fides.

    For the maybe ten people who see him doing it.

  • Red Tony||

    Didn't Bush cut some shrubbery or something to demonstrate he was "one o' us folks?"

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    I think whether it's actively campaigning years or down years should be taken into account.

  • CE||

    Trump just hires Republican kids to mow his lawn.

  • Palatki||

    Actually, they do it for free.

  • GILMORE™||

    I am starting to formulate a rule in my mind:

    - if you use twitter as a source, you should stop whatever you're doing, and go to the local bar and read what's on the toilet stalls instead

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    What's written on the bathroom stalls has more thought and gravitas than most of what's on twitter-- it took a certain amount of effort and planning to put it there. I mean, who carries writing implements into the bathroom?

  • sarcasmic||

    In one of the stalls in my high school someone had carved "They paint these walls to cover my pen, but the shithouse poet stricks again!"

    Stricks. What a maroon.

  • GILMORE™||

    who carries writing implements into the bathroom?

    (spits dip juice on the floor)

    my lawyer says a knife's can be technically interpreted as a writing implementer thing. so there's that.

  • The Last American Hero||

    I do. It's legal in most states and while not as powerful as a gun, is mightier than a sword.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    "I mean, who carries writing implements into the bathroom?"

    I'll bet Agile Cyborg does.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    GILMORE is the type of guy that, when you are pissing next to him, starts complaining to you about the grammar and penmanship of the graffiti on the wall. While he is at it, he probably sneaks a quick peek down to see what you are packing.

  • Red Tony||

    As someone who's been in the bathroom with him, lemme tell ya, it's not a quick peek.

  • GILMORE™||

    in fairness: it was very small and hard to distinguish from your fingers.

  • Red Tony||

    That's because you were looking at my THUMB.

    (That's right, men...it's tinier than you thought!)

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

  • ||

    I don't mean to be a negative nancy It wasn't bad. Hardly genre redefining, made M. Night Shyamalan look like a genius.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Hardly genre redefining

    Hey it's a niche! How many funny, white, Jew rappers are in the world?

  • ||

    Does Adam Yauch not count because he's a serious white Jewish rapper or because he's dead?

    If he didn't have his name plastered all over the piece, I would have thought he was Spose/Ryan Michael Peters who's arguably little different a couple of members of The Bloodhound Gang.

    If I think Matisyahu's career was hilarious does that make him a funny, white Jew rapper?

  • GILMORE™||

    How many funny, white, Jew rappers are in the world?

    sigh

  • ||

    Actually, remembering Andy Sandberg's rap career, I think it may've been sarcasm.

  • Sedona Vortex Hunter||

    growing up in SF, I remember when people used to actually play basketball at that basketball court instead of just making videos and commercials. Actually that is sort of like the entirety of the city now. San Francisco now feels more like 'San Francisco Land' at Disney world.

    A big, clean imitation of what people imagine SF to be like, if they were to perhaps someday ever go there.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Come on, we all know he's actually just trying to get a glimpse of your undies through your fly, that he may be unlimited in his criticism of your sartorial choices.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Idk, he'd probably rail against an unkempt bush.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    BUCS gonna get tackled at the urinal one of these days.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I will not be swayed by the thuggery so endemic to our world today.

  • GILMORE™||

    he'd probably rail against an unkempt bush.

    been there. that's what you get for hitting on vegans.

  • Matt Welch||

    This is a good comment.

  • GILMORE™||

    **Gilmore tip:

    Silk boxers on men:

    - preferred by serial killers and cokeheads. that guy who never sits still in the board room meeting? yes.
    - a common gift by girlfriends after 1 year. one they regret when they see them gradually disintegrating, yet you insist, 'they're finally comfortable'.
    - have a terrible habit of riding up and bunching above your belt, prompting co-workers to wedgie you

  • Eidde||

    Wouldn't that depend on the workplace?

  • GILMORE™||

    *Standard Gilmore Disclaimer:

    - people who don't wear suits to work don't matter
    - which basically means everyone these days
    - why do you think i started making this joke in the first place?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Somebody else posted this one before: GILMORE™ and his crew rolling up to the beach.

  • GILMORE™||

    *I* posted that. :)

  • Citizen X - #6||

    The one dude who didn't have it together enough to get his fucking glove on before he left the house - you aren't speaking to him anymore, are you.

  • GILMORE™||

    No Glove: No Love

  • Earth Skeptic||

    - if you use twitter as a source, you should stop whatever you're doing, and go to the local bar and read what's on the toilet stalls and shoot yourself in the head.

    FIFY

  • GroundTruth||

    Libertarians don't want to follow the rules that we as a society have agreed upon

    When did I "agree" to these rules?

    Perhaps Rand Paul agreed to certain neighborhood convenants when he purchased that house, if they were in effect at the time of purchase and if he was informed of their existence and content, or perhaps he bought in spite of them.

    I however have never "agreed" to a 21 (or 18 or whatever) year drinking age, or to participate in the socialist security fraud, etc.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Also, I'm not seeing that he actually was violating any HOA rules. Everyone just keeps saying maybe.

  • Sugarsail||

    What's really strange is someone who appreciates property rights would even buy in a HOA area where rights are notoriously limited by the local HOA bureaucracy.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Rand Paul is a communitarian-type libertarian, so he probably loves HOAs.

  • CE||

    At least with HOAs you know the rules up front.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    *takes giant bong hit* WHOA MAN

  • NealAppeal||

    There were rules to live in Galt's Gulch.

  • Ron||

    its not non libertarian to belong to an HOA if you agree with the HOA and in reality in many areas you can't buy a house that does not have some form of HOA

  • Ron||

    In fact Some HOA's are more libertarian than non HOA subdivisions because the owners are responsible for everything from road maintenance to security. no dependence on government care

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Except when you do something the HOA does not like after they voted to change the rules and then put a lien on your home.

    You have to be a moron to live in an HOA.

    Rand Paul was stupid for moving into an HOA.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    My folks are selling an extra lot in their fairly affluent neighborhood. There is no HOA, which is rare anymore. So the lot is going for more money than average.

  • Sevo||

    "Everyone just keeps saying maybe."

    Close enough to justify sucker-punching a guy who doesn't want you to steal his money.

  • MargeBouvier||

    Hard to imagine there would be a rule against mowing your own lawn!

  • Tony||

    You learn that you don't always get everything you want in preschool dude.

  • Adam330||

    Woosh

  • Citizen X - #6||

    So many points have gone over Tony's head that he's legally a citizen of Sparta.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    He does like to fight in the shade.

  • mortiscrum||

    I'm glad you included the link 'cause I needed further explanation for that joke.

  • Mickey Rat||

    And the rest of us are Helots.

  • ||

    Tony better go to the emergency room, because that is one wicked burn!

  • Palatki||

    Hm. i do believe this especially clueless remark of Tony's, finally proves that he is not a 4o year old in his parent's basement, but is actually just a chatter-bot, and a not especially clever one at that. It's too bad; i kind of liked him as our own retarded pet monkey that no one had the heart to poison his monkey chow. As a bot, he's a hell of a lot less sympathetic.

  • Jordan||

    You also learn that it's not nice to beat people up if they don't want to follow your commands.

  • Sevo||

    Tony has no intention of beating anyone. He stands by while the government pulls a gun on them and applauds.
    He's a thug and a coward.

  • Vitae Drinker||

    The irony of Tony saying this shows just how oblivious he really is.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Tony:

    You learn that you don't always get everything you want in preschool dude.

    Exactly. This is why good democrats like us spend our lives in quiet contentment and gratitude over the status quo, with simply no bitching to be had.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Hanging on in quiet desperation is the libertarian way.

  • CE||

    And if you complain about it, prepare to get your ribs broken, amirite?

  • LarryA||

    You learn that you don't always get everything you want in preschool dude.

    Progressives, unfortunately, don't.

  • MarkLastname||

    When are you going to learn everyone else isn't obligated to give you everything you want?

  • Elias Fakaname||

    "You learn that you don't always get everything you want in preschool dude."

    Tony, this isn't about you getting chased away from those little boys by the preschool security.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    "When did I "agree" to these rules?"

    You agreed to the idea that somebody can stick a flag in a piece of land and call it theirs, or could rope off an arbitrary square of Earth and say that they have exclusive access to it and will have that access forever or until they sell it, whichever comes first. Let's not pretend that there aren't a basic set of societal constructs that we don't use.

  • Eidde||

    You agreed to the government sticking in more than that.

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    So, he didn't. Got it.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Right. We can all pick and choose which rules we agreed to and want everyone else to follow, and which ones we didn't agree to and which we shouldn't follow. And nobody else is allowed to do the same.

    Some libertarians (not all, by the way) came up with a construct where we can individually and exclusively own natural resources, and they require everyone else to follow that construct as a sort of societal pact. They think it's covered under the "property rights" umbrella, and should be enforced by whichever government is in power. You can say the same about other arbitrary constructs with weak philosophical support, like intellectual "property" too, which is harshly enforced by the US government to the tune of billions of dollars each year.

    When did I agree to these rules?

  • Juice||

    Right. We can all pick and choose which rules we agreed to and want everyone else to follow, and which ones we didn't agree to and which we shouldn't follow. And nobody else is allowed to do the same.

    Pretty much. And whoever has control of the guns and jail cells wins. That's why liberty (or property) is a state of mind and must be spread as ideas.

    But also, when it comes to your personal liberty or property, then you almost certainly don't want someone to take them away. All I ask is that you respect these same wishes of others.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    That's a very golden rule-ish stance. The golden rule is great, but it fails when two people disagree on how they would like to be treated. If person A thinks that natural resources are claimable and that government should enforce such claims, and person B does not (either because they don't believe they're claimable, don't believe in government, or some combination) -- it's impossible to apply the golden rule. You can't "respect the wishes of others" when you wouldn't even apply those wishes to yourself.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    You agreed when you did not leave the town/county/state/nation that has laws you can't abide. And (for the time being) people in the US of A are free to leave, unlike some of those workers' paradises.

  • MargeBouvier||

    Yes, American citizens are free to leave any time... but keep paying taxes to the country they no longer live in for the rest of their lives.

  • MichaelL||

    Because the left will never have enough, of other people's money, to waste!

  • CE||

    You were outvoted, hence you agreed.

  • EscherEnigma||

    When did I "agree" to these rules?
    When you chose your parents, obviously.

    Less sarcastically, can you devise a system where you aren't bound to the rules and laws of a society you're born into? That would actually work and wouldn't be better described as a sci-fi dystopia?

  • Red Tony||

    I dunno, heaven?

    I take your point about it not happening on Earth. More reason to advocate for changing the rules if you dislike them rather than saying "well I never agreed to this, so gfy."

  • Qsl||

    The shorthand ethics is living under the rule set you expect everyone else to abide by. It's a choose-your-own-adventure type of affair where you choose the level of engagement with the greater society.

  • MarkLastname||

    The goal is to minimize the number of rules and maximize the individual freedom of all generations. If you're born into a society with anti-sodomy laws are you just going to say "well, we as a society agreed on this, so I'll accept it?"

  • MyCroftxXx||

    maybe somthing like Heinliens StarshipTrooper. Only Vets are given the franchise, pay taxes, civil service, free healthcare, military tribunals. you were free to join and gain the right of citizenship, but to had to agree to the rules and regs.

  • Azathoth!!||

    "When did I "agree" to these rules?"

    When you didn't go somewhere they weren't in force.

    Your parents make that choice for you, at first, but once you hit 18, it's your decision.

    'Do I stay in this place with all these rules I haven't expressly agreed to follow? Or do I find somewhere that I like more?'

    Most people just stay put. Most even invest, in some way, in that society.

    It's not a 'silence equals consent' idea--it's more like Jumanji. You could see the game that was being played, and you claimed to not agree with it, but you rolled the dice anyway. Now, you're in the game.

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    If that was the case, then the wackjob would have more effective avenues for getting what he wanted than breaking Rand's ribs.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Thank you Shep. I will start using "Mad as a wet hornet" in my day to day life.

  • Eidde||

    Wet hornets get angry? They're not very calm in the best of situations.

    So I guess my "hosing down the hornets' nest" plan should be reconsidered?

  • Red Tony||

    Yes. With gasoline.

    Then you aerosol flamethrower that sumbitch and run like hell.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    "Hosing down the hornet's nest" is a euphemism in the Chipper household used for certain situations.

  • ||

    GQ's Jack Moore...

    Libertarians don't want to follow the rules that we as a society have agreed upon, because they feel those rules step on their freedoms. And sometimes they might even be right, but that doesn't mean that they are above those rules and can do whatever they want.

    The "G" is for "Godwin".

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Funny how after the election of Trump, there were a whole bunch of hyperventilating journalists who suddenly didn't want to follow rules society had agreed upon.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Savage.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    A comment so savage, it thinks liberalism is a mental disorder.

  • CE||

    When that permanent Electoral College majority was imminent, the Founders were wise.
    When Trump won, the Electoral College was archaic.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    The same way that the constitution is a 'living, breathing document'.

  • Adam330||

    I find it interesting that all these commenters are quick to accuse Paul of violating the HOA regs, but none of them say what he allegedly did or what rule he allegedly violated. On the other hand, none of them seem the least bit interested in the guy who clearly broke a criminal law.

  • GILMORE™||

    none of them say what he allegedly did or what rule he allegedly violated

    pish posh. where did you ever get the impression was about actually gathering and substantiating claims of fact?

    As any cursory glance at the NYT or WaPo should prove, real journalism is about recycling innuendo and allegations.

  • GILMORE™||

    * -

    where did you ever get the impression journalism was about

    (shakes fist, mumbles *@#&$@*)#& edit button*)

  • Red Tony||

    So a lot like Reason comment threads, only with allegations thrown in.

  • sarcasmic||

    Not following HOA regs is violence, just like speech is violence. So Rand started the violence and deserves whatever he got.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Yeah I found it interesting that all of these writers were essentially parroting the ANTIFA claim that violence against individuals you disagree with is morally acceptable.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    So by that notion, anything I do to some filthy progtard is just fine then? Ok.

    Considering the balance of physical power between me and pretty much all progtards, they won't like the results much though.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    I mean who hasn't wanted to Goldberg spear other commentators on this site?

  • Hugh Akston||

    I have to assume that's either a gay euphemism or a Jewish euphemism. Maybe both?

  • damikesc||

    Pro wrestling reference, I'm almost positive.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Ah, so the gay one.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    ...Zing!

  • loveconstitution1789||

    But are you HIV positive?

  • Just Say'n||

    Second time someone has tried to kill Rand in a year and he's caught without a gun. No amount of Rush references can salvage the libertarian street cred he's lost for not packing heat

  • Domestic Dissident||

    Yeah, I'm a little surprised Senator Paul hasn't figured out by now that this isn't fun loving, happy go lucky Bill Clinton's America anymore. The Marxist scum are literally out for blood now, and he's obviously on their hit list.

    The happiest ending to this story would have been if in the middle of his assault, that idiot Obama Momma neighbor had suddenly found a piece of lead going through that pile of shit between his ears.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Or some basic sprawling skills.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Who thinks it's a good idea to shoot and kill someone in a fist fight? I haven't seen any evidence that the guy who beat Paul's ass was trying to kill him, or even that the injuries weren't the result of a mutual fight.

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    Can't tell if serious...

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Are you implying that fist fights are punishable by death?

    I'm curious - have you ever gotten into a fight before? If you did, would you freak out and kill the person?

    There are a lot of people who would answer "yes" to that question, which is why the gun culture is so troubling to a lot of us.

  • Mickey Rat||

    You do realize that what this maniac did to Paul could have killed him or crippled him?

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    No, he doesn't. He's never been in a real fight in his life.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Are you implying that fist fights are punishable by death?
    Heck, just yelling at someone can be punishable by death if the other guy was "afraid".

    Seriously, out of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law we have a case where two guys got into an argument in a restaurant, one of them goes out to his car, retrieves his gun, goes back to the restaurant, and shoots the guy in the back. And he gets off because he was "scared".

  • Just Say'n||

    Yeah, 'stand your ground' is problematic. What the hell is this Salon?

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    Ok I guess you were serious.

    Yes I have been in fistfights. I was nearly beaten to death. Not for a lack of trying by the 3 individuals involved.

    My guess is you haven't. If you had, you'd know how quickly things get serious, and someone gets badly hurt.

    Whatever point you think you're making, understand, you're an idiot. If you try to hurt someone they can shoot you, and be morally and legally entitled to do so.

    I carry a gun because I don't want to get it fistfights, get a skull fracture, vertigo, multiple surgeries and 2 years off work recovering.

    THAT is what the real consequences of fistfights are. Only a retard would take your position.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    "No, wait! It never happens that way in the movies!"

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Man, you people fly off the handle so quickly. A simple question and debate almost invariably escalates into a battle of name calling. It's exactly this escalation that makes me concerned that you would not have the ability to help but killing someone else if you were involved in a simple fist fight, even if you were a mutual participant. So thanks for making my point for me.

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    Are you seriously upset about being called names?

    No wonder you think fistfights aren't serious, you're literally a child.

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    And I got robbed. If I get robbed, you're god damned riiggt I'l escalate it. Stop with the hyperventilating about perfectly appropriate recations, and projecting your mental weakness onto others.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    "And I got robbed. If I get robbed, you're god damned riiggt I'l escalate it."

    Haha - but I'm the idiot.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You are an idiot Junk.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Better be careful, escalators are dangerous things.

    https://tinyurl.com/y8vsvtqe

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    If you read up on self-defense law, you'll find that there are circumstances where an unarmed assault can legally justify an armed response, for instance in cases involving disparity of force.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    There are some cases where it may be entirely justified, but in most cases it is not. The fact that Rand's life was not in jeopardy is pretty good evidence that it would not have been appropriate here either.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Cracked ribs happen all the time. Hell, a vigorous towel rubbing after a shower does it to me all the time. Thankfully that's not junk science as only you would understand.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I rip out ribs from my rib cage all the time and make new women with them.

    I have a harem. Are you jealous?

  • epsilon given||

    How is Rand Paul supposed to know that his life isn't in jeopardy? Wait until an unprovoked, premeditated attack is completed?

    No, if Rand Paul was carrying a gun (and perhaps he was, but didn't have time to pull it before the attack was over), he would have been justified in pulling it out and using it to stop the attack.

    Indeed, fists and feet typically kill more people per year than rifles of all types do, so attacks with fists and feet qualify as lethal force.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Rand clearly she have unleashed some Kung Fu on his progtard neighbor.

  • Jordan||

    It only takes one punch to kill or maim someone.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    WTF?

    So the next time someone starts physically assaulting you, you will constrain your response until you figure out ultimate intent?

    Can I get a life insurance policy on you?

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Feel free to continue to live in fear. The vast majority of physical fights do not end in death or maiming. You people would end that if it was your decision. But go ahead and paint the non-death crowd as the crazy ones.

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    "Feel free to continue to live in fear. "

    Save that nonsense. You're not brave because you refuse to recognize the very real consequences of violence.

  • Fuck =><= sevo||

    Lololol He says

    "So the next time someone starts physically assaulting you, you will constrain your response until you figure out ultimate intent?"

    and you respond

    "The vast majority of physical fights do not end in death or maiming"

    It's like your actually trying to convince people you're an idiot.

  • Myshkin78||

    I think almost everyone was already convinced

  • Paloma||

    Neither do the vast majority of gun incidents.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    The vast majority of rapes don't end in death either. You people would end that...

  • Paloma||

    Why does having a gun mean you automatically go to shooting and killing someone? This wasn't a fist fight, it was a blitz attack from behind. If Paul had pulled out a gun and threatened him, and if the guy didn't back down, shoot him, I see no problem. Attacker deserved it.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Why does having a gun mean you automatically go to shooting and killing someone?

    You should direct that question to the people who have defended the idea of shooting and killing people in a fist fight because of the theoretically serious potential it has.

  • Paloma||

    This was not a fist fight. It was a blitz attack from behind. Look up the FBI profile for "blitz attacks". The offender is someone who is not good with words, has low self esteem, and thus tries to surprise the victim with a blitz from behind. The offender is simply a weird stalker type who was a bit jealous of Paul's "celebrity".

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    There's no credible evidence to support anything you said.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Luckily, the perp will get to experience the criminal justice system and I hope Rand Paul sues this guy so bad that he loses his house and has to move away.

    I would suggest that Rand Paul start carry a gun. These lefty nuts seem to want him out of the picture.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    For some reason I had an image of Rand Paul having his bones laced with adamantium, plus adding adamantium claws (like Wolverine). Then it occurred to me that Wolverine is probably a libertarian.

    Just a strange, random thought.

  • Paloma||

    Paul wasn't attacked from behind with no warning?

  • Paloma||

    Blitz attack: "The delivery of overpowering force, usually performed in a manner of surprise so as to incapacitate a victim."

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    1) "The offender is someone who is not good with words"
    2) "has low self esteem"
    3) "The offender is simply a weird stalker type who was a bit jealous of Paul's "celebrity".

    I'm not seeing any credible evidence to support any of those assertions. You can hypothesize that this was really his motivation, but it's just hand waving. As far as I know, neither the defense nor the prosecution have offered your argument as an explanation.

    It sounds like he probably was attacked from behind, but we've only heard one side of the story so far. The word that keeps coming up is "tackled."

    Anyway, this doesn't look like it was an attempt to murder Rand Paul, and I don't think the prosecution is going to push for this either.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Cats laying pn your chest frequently cause cracked ribs. I mean it's so common it's not even really considered a medical injury. Sheesh, why is everyone overreacting, right?

  • Elias Fakaname||

    He was indeed taken from behind with no warning.

  • Just Say'n||

    You are all tragically stupid. My comment was clearly in jest. There's a Rush reference for Christ's sake

  • Sugarsail||

    The only reason so many people want to punch Libertarians is they can't win in a rational debate against a Libertarian. It's almost a compliment.

  • spec24||

    Bravo

  • Curt2004||

    +1

  • Paloma||

    True. It's also why the offender decided to attack from behind. No guts for verbal confrontation.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Its a badge of honor to be able to out debate Republicans and lefties.

  • dantheserene||

    WTF do HOA rules have to do with assault and battery? Why would any sane person even bring that up like it was relevant?

  • sarcasmic||

    Not following the rules is violence against those who do, which means Rand deserved to be assaulted. After all, he started it. Duh. All goodthinking people know this.

  • ||

    WTF do HOA rules have to do with assault and battery?

    Are they HOA rules?

    Not to justify the assault and battery but, neighborhoods/municipalities do have noise ordinances and while I presume innocence on the part of Paul, you can't chuck your rotten pumpkins over the fence in the back of your yard or start mowing at 11:30 at night.

  • Rhywun||

    It's relevant because of his politics. Switch the parties around and the entire story would be different.

  • mortiscrum||

    It's the same logic that makes people question what she was wearing that might, or how much she drank, or what she said. I think it's a pathological tendency to try to figure out what the victim might have done to cause it. If even the slightest thing is found, no matter how tenuously related, we can all breath a sigh of relief: I wouldn't have been dumb enough to do that! I'm safe! I don't need to think about that happening to me!

  • ||

    Okay what, exactly, was the dispute immediately prior to the tackling about? Pumpkins? Compost? Lawn mowing?

    Is there potentially any evidence of anything even slightly non-libertarian going on like the compost reeking or he's letting the halloween pumpkins rot in an unsightly manner on top of the fence?

    Or is it really straight up "I don't like what he does on his property and should be entitled to tackling him!" and libertarianism has fuck all to do with it?

  • GILMORE™||

    what, exactly, was the dispute immediately prior to the tackling about? Pumpkins? Compost? Lawn mowing?

    I believe the point is simply to assume that some collectively-agreed-upon "rule" was violated, thus justifying the socialist vigilante outrage.

  • damikesc||

    Indeed. That nobody can explain still what the dispute was about indicates there wasn't a dispute.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    There better have been some inappropriate dick sticking going on at some point, whether neighbor wife or pumpkin, or the whole thing is rather ridiculous.

  • ||

    Again, I don't assume guilt on the part of Paul but if my neighbor had amassed garbage for the last 15 yrs. and I couldn't get the local PD or whomever to at least write him a ticket because he says he's composting or he's a Senator, or both I'd at least be tempted to, assuming sleeping with his wife wasn't on the table (Kelley Paul? *googles* would.), break his ribs.

  • damikesc||

    Just as a reminder to Libertarian types:

    The Progs want to hurt YOU too.

    It's about time for somebody on the Right to start laying waste to the fascists of the Left.

  • Fancylad||

    The fascist left are too useful to the men in power right now to allow that to happen.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Desiring death, degradation, or dishonor of one's political opponents is what the weak minded sheep of the left and right want. It is uncompromisingly amoral; I will only ever defend myself from their aggression, not join them in wanton violence.

  • Red Tony||

    You got that right, Viceroy of Virtue.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Damn, if I ever get banned I reincarnate under that handle. *tips hat*

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Then I shall be the Monarch of Virtue.

    (That's a butterfly joke)

  • Red Tony||

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz4PdpfI7zY

    Also does anybody know the link coding so I can make the link be words?

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Standard html coding, so < a href="url" > < /a >

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    Chrome has an extention called "reasonable",

    one click can

    insert all the coding
  • BestUsedCarSales||

    There is a firefox one too, but I can't remember the name.

  • Red Tony||

    I'm on Brave.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Amen, good sir. Ever shall we take the high road.
    [Exhales smoke]

  • Stormy Dragon||

    I'd just like to point out the irony of someone with a woodchipper reference in their handle getting all sanctimonious about their pacifism.

  • MarkLastname||

    Sarcasm. Does. Not. Compute.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Oh, I don't know about the dishonor bit. Dishonoring folks doesn't violate the all holy NAP, does it?

  • Just Say'n||

    Attacking the sacred honor of the NAP does violate the NAP. I challenge you to a duel

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    When Jeet Heer has more class than you, it's time for some reflection.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    "It's about time for somebody on the Right to start laying waste to the fascists of the Left."

    Good. It's about time the rest of you started reaching this inevitable conclusion. Progtards ultimately cannot be reasoned with. Tony is a prime example of that.

  • spec24||

    I am by FAR, much more libertarian than Paul, and I also live in a community with a homeowners association and I can assure these assholes that it is those people who are NOT libertarian who are always trying to avoid the rules.

    Rules that we as a sociery have agreed upon? Fuck you, GQ.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Christ, left wingers are such assholes.

  • spec24||

    They're worse than any of us can imagine.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    They're not really even human. Remember that when you consider being merciful to one of them.

  • CE||

    And now we know how thuggish organizations like Antifa find followers. Advocating or cheering for physical violence against people because of their political beliefs is the opposite of the libertarian non-agression principle. But it follows logically from political theories that state the majority is entitled to take as much of your cash as it wants, and spend it on what it wants, or tell you how you can live your life, just because they outnumber you and can bring greater physical force to bear.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    Why was he mowing in November? He probably wasn't collecting leaves, because his shitty fucking Craftsman doesn't have bags.

  • Mickey Rat||

    People were moeing in my area last week which is a good deal north of Kentucky.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    Have you considering bum rushing them?

  • ||

    Anyone notice how cocky the left is getting with their 'tough guy' attitude?

    I can jit on Jeet's hair and he'd run away like a little hare to his cubby hole.

    It's in their DNA. Gulags and all that. Force is all they recognize and too ingrained into their numbed skulls to comprehend with any profound principles the concept of the NAP and what libertarians mean by private property - which is the bedrock of Western liberty.

    About the GQ guy. Huh. Even GQ is in on the ignorant act. Well, here's the thing. As anyone knows by watching court TV, neighbour disputes transcends politics and ideology. It's just that - a dispute between neighbours. To try and tie it to libertarianism is a straw man. The left just love to beat it. This guy and this guy alone is responsible and should face the consequences of his stupid actions. Everything else falls into the Whoopi theory of 'it's not rape-rape' or victim blaming. I just love watching them make total immoral asses of themselves employing Soave's shtick of 'to be sure' regarding this attack.

    It's par for the course for left-wing journalists to mock people who cut their own lawns. I guess they prefer the tactic of hiring illegals to cut it.

    Clowns. I wouldn't want to build a bird house - let alone a civilization - around people who think this way.

  • BYODB||


    Anyone notice how cocky the left is getting with their 'tough guy' attitude?

    Yeah. Maybe it's because people have forgotten about the time they tried forced sterilization of citizens? They're never more than a breath away from suggesting genocide, so this kind of small potatoes 'victim blaming' isn't that surprising to me. It's an ideology of force by definition, in both the macro and the micro.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Anyone notice how cocky the left is getting with their 'tough guy' attitude?

    Provided they outnumber the victim 20 to 1, or can hit him from behind.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Pretty much. If a progtard were going to rape an infant, he would need four progtard buddies, one to hold each of the infant's limbs down, and another one to continually punch the infant in the head before he would possibly be ready to even try.

  • ||

    Anywaysssss. I'm with Gilmore. We've become waaayayyy too casual these days. I mean, this thing of men wearing flips flops and sandals into a respectable restaurant has to stop. Would it kill you to wear shoes FFS?

    I don't take anyone seriously who walks into an establishment looking like they're about to break out the uekele and do White Snake covers with it.

    Fuck that.

    Hide your ugly toes.

  • ||

    As someone who wears slide-style sandals in dry weather well into winter, as well as patronizes 'restaurants' that would not only throw me out, but possibly revoke my membership for wearing sandals, might I suggest you're spending your money at the wrong establishments?

  • ||

    /waves fist. Fills glove with cement pieces.

  • ||

    Take it easy Judge Smails, no need to go all Rene Boucher. I like to think I'm more Ty Webb than Al Czervik

  • ||

    My buddy wears sandals. He always grins whenever he sees me.

  • Paloma||

    And my peep toe stilettos?

  • ||

    Women don't count. Especially hot ones.

  • ||

    http://righteousmind.com/large.....ian-psych/

    Libertarians - or people predisposed to be so - are logical and reasoned. THAT'S why half-wits like Jeet mock them. It's very easy to bug, tease and target people who such a profile.

    The left, which puts principals above principles; emotions over reason, can but react with empty smugness and, eventually, violence.

    And since progressivism is a top-down ideology that uses emotional tactics to sell its ideas and deeds, leaves itself naturally open to force and violence. When they speak of violence (and racism and the like) it's all projection.

  • NoVaNick||

    My prog neighbors complain about our cat going in their yard when he occasionally gets out. They are weird bird people and I worry about the cat's and my own safety. Never mind that there are at least a half dozen other roaming cats in our hood and I have never discussed politics with them. I offered to get them one of those ultrasonic animal scarers but they refused it because, of course, progs just want to complain, they are never interested in solutions.

  • ||

    Again. Projection. I don't doubt progs are the worst neighbours on average.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    So you think you have the right to dump animal waste on other people's land without permission and if they complain, that makes them "prog"?

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    That doesn't look to be what he's saying at all.

  • NoVaNick||

    They are confirmed progs-they always post yard signs for candidates of the D variety and I overhear them frequently complaining about any politician who doesn't have a D after their name.

    As far as animal waste, they have never said anything about our cat crapping in their yard, they don't like him there because they are obsessed with birds. I try to keep him in but the kids let him out sometimes.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    So what if they're "obsessed" with birds? It's their land. They said they don't want your cat on it. Keep your cat off their land.

  • NoVaNick||

    I said I bought them a critter scarer but they weren't interested and I make every effort to keep the cat inside.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    They're under no obligation to comply with your demands so that you're willing to respect their property rights.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Look at you...all pro property rights now.

    Funny how lefties are pro-property rights when it sounds good but most of the time lefties want to end property rights.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Stormy, cats go where the fuck they want. Learn to deal. And don't EVER think of harming one. It won't go well for you.

  • Sevo||

    Stormy Dragon|11.8.17 @ 3:46PM|#
    "They're under no obligation to comply with your demands so that you're willing to respect their property rights."

    And I see you are under no obligation to keep from being a hypocrite. Lefties are like that.

  • Jayburd||

    Do I have the right to leave strychnine in raw hamburger in my lawn?

  • Stormy Dragon||

    This is a great example of how phony "libertarians" are. Property rights are only for people in NoVaNick's tribe. He's free to do whatever he likes with the land of non-tribe members though, because they don't get any rights.

  • ||

    It's not what he said.

  • NoVaNick||

    Well, the lady I'm talking about had a cat who she let out and I never complained. My wife complains about the junk this lady piles up in her yard too, but has never said a word to her. I'm very much live and let live for all-unless they were doing something that harmed me, my family, our property, I'm fine with it.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    We all know that Stormy hates property rights and is just full of shit.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Well now, as far as "harming your property" goes, letting out a cat is one thing but piling up junk in the yard is something else. Not only does (or can) that pose health and safety risks, if you consider negative impact on your property values to be "harm" then believe me, this is harmful to your property and you have more than reasonable grounds to say something to her about it.

  • NoVaNick||

    Thanks-the said lady is also elderly and possibly mentally ill-a classic hoarder. Her kids come by sometimes and clean out some of the junk, but she just gets more of it.

  • Sevo||

    Stormy Dragon|11.8.17 @ 3:12PM|#
    "This is a great example of how phony "libertarians" are."

    THIS being a great example of how stupid lefties are.
    Sorry you missed your smart pills this morning; you should STFU.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    I am confident that none of my white neighbors are going to come at my 300 lbs black ass over the nasty ginko [sic] fruits my beautiful tree liberally spreads around the neighborhood.

    White privilege isn't real and you're a morbidly obese hypocrite. Nice.

  • Longtobefree||

    Well I guess; if the ass alone is 300 lbs, we don't even want to contemplate the rest -- --

  • Robespierre Josef Stalin Pot||

    It's lucky I live in a neighborhood with lots of crackheads. As long as your yard doesn't contain any needles in it your pretty much ok.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Bitch, go pay your fucking mortgage.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    This, my friends, is what libertarianism looks like in practice. I'll grow what I want, put trash where I want, and maintain my space however I want, and you can't do anything about it. FREEDOM!

    I read this and I see a truly fundamental disagreement. This person explicitly states that libertarian looks like people doing what they want. They stated it without spin or particular exaggeration (perhaps trash where I want, but even then not really) and that was the joke. The core concept is ridiculous to them.

    I don't know if this is a divide that can be crossed.

  • Red Tony||

    Totalitarianists gotta be totalitarianists.

    By the same proxy, we could argue that this is what libertarianism looks like in practice: you're allowed to weigh 300+ and we won't force you to diet. Fatty.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    One of the key gaps in the leftist condemnation of libertarianism is the inability to recognize that with freedom comes responsibility. A society built with a minimum of laws relies instead on its citizens having their own governors in place. The statists are scared to death of the challenges of maintaining such a society; the anarchists and nihilists give the statists plenty of ammunition for their attacks.

  • mortiscrum||

    What does "own governors" even look like? This has always been the haziest part of libertarian philosophy to me (and the least explained). Unlike crackpot anarchists, libertarians at least admit at some level that something that looks like government is spontaneously forming and inevitable. What do you imagine forming, and how is it better than what we have now?

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    One of the key gaps in the leftist condemnation of libertarianism is the inability to recognize that with freedom comes responsibility. A society built with a minimum of laws relies instead on its citizens having their own governors in place. The statists are scared to death of the challenges of maintaining such a society; the anarchists and nihilists give the statists plenty of ammunition for their attacks.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Well, there's one silver lining: the progs aren't even pretending to be peaceful people any more. Their embrace of violence in the name of their ideology is out there in the open for everybody to see.

  • GILMORE™||

    ""Rand Paul's broken ribs are a goddamn case study in why we need regulations.""

    actually, that article is a case study in why this guy isn't being paid for his legal acumen

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    The thing I wonder is this. Say that Paul was breaking HOA rules. Then regulations were in place and the assaulter did not follow the means to deal with it. Say that Paul was not breaking HOA rules. Then the argument falls apart as well, unless the issue is that the HOA should have passed these very specific rules here because the neighbor didn't like it.

    What the fuck do they want? I know I'm being an idiot here, because the real reason this is okay is because of Paul's politics. But jesus, how can someone read this and not be disgusted?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Yes, I'm victim-blaming. Yes, I'm saying Rand Paul was "asking for it," over these past 17 years. Yes, I'm talking from a position of strength, and privilege, with a dollop of hypocrisy — as I am confident that none of my white neighbors are going to come at my 300 lbs black ass over the nasty ginko fruits my beautiful tree liberally spreads around the neighborhood.

    I can't help but wonder if he would accept he was asking for it if a neighbor assaults him. Hypocrisy doesn't suddenly become logically valid once you comment that you are aware of your hypocrisy.

  • Sevo||

    He also needs to understand that a .32 outweighs 300#.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    Unless he calls force fields. But it's gotta be before you open fire, or it doesn't count.

  • ||

    people who haven't thought deeply about how to live with others.

    "You can do what you want and I can do what I want and, so long as we're not hurting anybody, the government can do nothing." It's… cute, as theories of social interactions go. It's not a workable basis for law and governance.

    So, 'people doing things' is a well thought-out rational basis for law and governance?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It's also an extreme reduction of libertarian thought. There's books out there on it people, he could go read them.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    Yes, I'm talking from a position of strength, and privilege, with a dollop of hypocrisy — as I am confident that none of my white neighbors are going to come at my 300 lbs black ass over the nasty ginko fruits my beautiful tree liberally spreads around the neighborhood.

    But Rand Paul's broken ribs are a goddamn case study in why we need regulations.

    He's right that his neighbors probably won't confront him physically, but the police will have little problem choking him to death while they enforce his ginkgo tree regulation.

  • BYODB||

    Look, a couple of black people choked to death is the price we pay to live in a civil society.

    /sarc

    I do like how the updated quote appears to completely miss the application of the NAP here. Not surprising, since that author appears to be a raging retard.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    WTF I love the police now

  • Sevo||

    "Yes, I'm victim-blaming. Yes, I'm saying Rand Paul was "asking for it," over these past 17 years. Yes, I'm talking from a position of strength, and privilege, with a dollop of hypocrisy — as I am confident that none of my white neighbors are going to come at my 300 lbs black ass over the nasty ginko fruits my beautiful tree liberally spreads around the neighborhood."

    Yes, you're a scum-bag slaver.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    I took his comment here as a dollop of self-deprecating humor. We do get to laugh sometimes, ya know

  • ||

    I got way too mad reading that Ellie Mystal garbage. Makes me happy I moved from Baltimore back home to New Hampshire where people do not bother their neighbors over petty BS and either leave people alone, or help them when in need. The culture rot in society is real.

  • Domestic Dissident||

    It appears that idiot literally thinks that he is above the law, as the names of his stupid blog suggests. That same asshole wrote a piece a year ago saying that blacks should be able to get away with perpetrating crimes against whites.

  • NoVaNick||

    I lived in Baltimore for a while too. Can't say I had anyone there ever bother me over petty BS, in fact, its probably the one place I've lived where I can say that nobody gives a shit about much of anything-guess it depends on the neighborhood. I would much rather live in NH, though.

  • Ron||

    Compost piles don't stink unless their commercial sized but thats typical of apartment dwellers who do not understand anything outside of their concrete jungle. the whole reaction to this incident really shows the shallowness of the left to any intellectual thought. If it had been a democrat who a was tackled all people to teh right would be trashed as unhinged and the demands for their thoughts to be outlawed and the blaming of Rush Limbaugh would be loudest

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    Conservatarian: A libertarian who got mugged.

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    Conservatarian: A libertarian who got mugged by the liberal establishment.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Keep working on it. You'll come up with something soon

  • ChipToBeSquare||

    Political discourse has become impossible. This would be beautiful from a libertarian point of view, one of the most amazing developments in decades, because it slows both sides from being able to impose their will upon us

    Except that political violence has taken its place

  • RenaD||

    "You can do what you want and I can do what I want and, so long as we're not hurting anybody, the government can do nothing." It's… cute, as theories of social interactions go. It's not a workable basis for law and governance.

    Um, actually, it IS.

    Who is this idiot anyway?

  • ||

    Especially considering 'social interactions' can form the basis of law and governance I reckon.

  • Empress Trudy||

    No, they have regulations. There's nothing inherently libertarian about blithely ignoring the ones you've already tacitly agreed to follow.

  • Sevo||

    Do you have any cite telling us that happened?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    No, they have regulations. There's nothing inherently libertarian about blithely ignoring the ones you've already tacitly agreed to follow.

    There's no indication that Paul is 'blithely' ignoring any rules. He may well be doing so fully knowing the legal consequences.

    I live in a condo, and I'm the president of the condo association. The association has a rule that occupants can't put things like air conditioners in their windows, but each unit has one mounted into a wall in the living room. My unit is on the second floor of a two-story building, with windows facing east and south. It gets really hot in the summer, and the layout is such that you can't really create a cross-breeze. So I have a portable A/C that I put in the window on days when it's hot.

    I am fully aware that it's against the rules, and have informed the BoD that I consider my health to be more valuable than the standard monthly fine for noncompliance. I told them that I've taken other steps to try to control the temperature, such as installing double- and triple-paned windows and buying as powerful an A/C unit I can find that will fit in the wall mount, but it's still hot enough that I have concerns about myself and any guests I might have. They haven't fined me in years since I started doing this, but I wouldn't bitch or abuse my power as president to veto if they chose to.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    This is why we need regulations, people: do you want some neighborhood pumpkin patch going on? I didn't think so.

  • ||

    That's some piece of derp by Elie Mystal.

  • Rockabilly||

    GQ should stick to writing articles about how to make your date think you care what they have to say.

  • Jayburd||

    Let's all chip in and get Rand a rice vest to see if the fucking things work.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Rand Paul is going to own that neighbor's interest in that invention after suing that guy for attacking him.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Hate to say this on a libertarian site, but my prayers are with Senator Paul.

    Also, have to say that Mystal's weird piece ended on a note that strongly smacked ot sarcasm (we can overlook the fact that a properly maintained compost pile doesn't stink, but that's for another day)

    Get well, Senator. And carry a canister of Mace with you at all times when out in the yard

  • jeffersonianideal||

    Lew Rockwell, who is in a position to know, said Rand Paul has never declared himself to be a full-fledged libertarian. Still, once all the facts are in about this unfortunate occurrence involving trespass and assault, it may serve as a teachable moment about property rights and the nonaggression axiom.

  • geo||

    "The Paul's landscaping looks just like everyone's place in Rivergreen. Wish I could get him to cut my lawn," said neighbor Robert Warner.

    Seven other neighbors have spoken up to agree. Clearly, Boucher who is known to have far-left politics, and lives alone, has more than a few screws loose. He "invented" a rice filled vest to relieve back pain that sells on QVC Home Shopping Network. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wswTTJtxkg8 His big microwavable vest venture was a failure. Basically Boucher is a medical hack and a scammer. But the media never misses a chance to trash someone like Rand Paul that they don't like. Mentioning that Boucher is also banned from possessing firearms or weapons of any kind seems to have been left out of most reports. The attack, because it was on a Senator, is technically a felony, but of course the guy mowing his lawn was the one to blame, not the loonie attacker. It probably irritates the media that Rand Paul doesn't hire illegal aliens to mow his lawn like they do, so of course they have to attack his manhood by claiming his riding mower represents his virility.

  • Bubba Jones||

    Good point. It's not safe for a politician to hire a lawn service because it's going to get nailed for a lack of permits, licenses, or immigration documents.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Bag of rice is good for applying heat in a deformable container. Bag of frozen peas or corn is better than conventional ice packs for the same reason. I always considered these kind of a DIY way to apply heat or cold -- I can't imagine spending $50+ for it. I guess it's worth that extra cost to some people to make it portable and to make it last longer. I don't know that I'd call that a scam though.

  • Bubba Jones||

    The HOA was ineffective at enforcing the covenants because libertarian?

    WTF.

    Sounds more like reinforcement of the libertarian premise that government is ineffective.

  • AndyWingall||

    Kinda like that brainless left wing chick Hayley Geftman-Gold, the CBS executive, who posted a social message that stated the Vegas shooting victims deserved the massacre because "country music fans often are Republican gun toters." Left Wingers can find intelligence in her brazen comment, and I'm sure she'll get a high-paying post somewhere that favors Lefties and considers her words heroic, but now that she's complaining about getting death threats herself it's a bit priceless. It's called tit for tat, the never-ending revenge scenario. But of course, the Left is always the victim, no matter what the situation. To those who control the narrative, getting beat up by a thug because you hold pro-American individualistic opinions is totally acceptable. So is a bloodbath in a Christian church. So are gay men gunned down in a gay nightclub, as long as the perpetrator is of the correct race and religion. There's actually a reasonable method to the Left's seemingly irrational chaotic madness--it's called tearing everything down so they can rebuild the world in their own image. Good luck, comrades.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    You have one side saying it's about grass clippings, which is absurd, and the other side taking the opportunity to paint it as a political thing based strictly on the "evidence" that one guy is a democrat and the other guy is a republican. There was something going on here, and I kinda can't wait to find out what it is. And whether or not Kevin Spacey was involved.

  • Thereisnoreason||

    There is actually no evidence that Sen. Paul had any problems with his neighborhood HOA. In fact, there are multiple articles out with quotes from his neighbors stating the exact opposite. I wouldn't expect any "journalist" from reason to do any actual research though. Truth be told, this is just another case of a leftist committing an act of violence.

  • MamaLiberty||

    Take a look at this extremely well written article if you'd like a comprehensive overview of libertarian views and goals.

    http://tinyurl.com/ybx9xmtx

  • Sevo is my bitch||

    No, it is a poorly penned hack job based on gross caricature

  • Penny_Worth||

    It's too bad the writer for the Detroit Free Press and the other media were too busy reporting on 'what a bad neighbor ' Dr. Paul is to even report accurately on his injuries or his other neighbors' reports. Other neighbors have mentioned they had no idea what the problem was, unless it was political. Regardless, this 'neighbor' has no ground at all to attack Senator, as he just took the law into his own hands. If the guy was really in the midst of a 'neighborly dispute', why not get a petition going among the neighbors or complain to Senator Paul ? This guy makes Bernie Sanders' supporters look worse than they are.

  • Sevo is my bitch||

    Well, has his neighbor been convicted? Let's not rush to judgment, like libertarians would like to remind everyone.

    Oh wait, Rand Paul is a Republican.

    His neighbor does not need to be tried, he is guilty

  • Geri||

    your ignorance is showing... you might want to discretely tuck it back up in there...

  • RafaelGuzman||

    As much as I'd like to believe that this says something about the intellectual abilities of the talking heads, it has far more to do with the insane partisan tribalism that afflicts a supposedly tolerant and cosmopolitan society.

    It's not "un-libertarian" to enter into a contract (such as with a homeowner's association) and follow the rules set forth. Perhaps there's some sort of agreement that Rand Paul made that he isn't honoring, but all sorts of people renege or attempt to skirt the terms of their contracts regardless of their political orientations.

    It *is* astoundingly anti-liberal (small "l", not as in the specific faction of the Democratic party but of the general society we live in) to suggest that an individual may use violence to extract retribution for *perceived* violations of group norms.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Nothing in the NAP says God's Own Prohibitionists and People's Democratic Statists can't initiate force against each other. The Old Dutch Clock it told me so, and that is how I came to know!

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    Perhaps journalists, comedians, and political pundits are former rock-throwing, Starbucks-trashing, fragile millenial anarchist anti-fa SJW's.

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    The only thing to do is to say "oh the humanity" while they beat us to a pulp, and then write a column about it in Reason afterwards. Whatever you do, don't defend yourself.

  • Geri||

    whatever Rand Paul did, or did not do, he didn't deserve to get beaten half to death. That said, he knew the rules and regs of the development before he bought the property. If he didn't like them he should have bought a house elsewhere. BUT... the severity of the beating he got from his "doctor" neighbor, was extreme, and so not okay... Dr Neighbor needs to spend some time in prison for his out-of-control temper.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online